What's new
By:
Filters

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

Damn reports are that Chet tore a ligament in his foot... tough news for OKC.

Knicks fans are reporting that the Chet news tilts the leverage in the completely unrelated Jazz-Knicks negotiations towards Leon the Don. (sarcasm)
 
The designated rookie rule would stop the Cavs from getting Mitchell..so it would have to be a 3 team deal..maybe it is the Miami scenario?
 
whatthe said:
The designated rookie rule would stop the Cavs from getting Mitchell..so it would have to be a 3 team deal..maybe it is the Miami scenario?
Click to expand...
I don't think that is an issue... its only guys you have traded for on those deals. They good.

I still think the three team Miami-Cleveland-Utah scenario could be real good.

Would Cleveland trade a 2025 or 2026 unprotected pick, Okoro, and Sexton for Herro... might be a touch rich but we could add something on our end to even it out.

We come away with 4 picks, Okoro, Sexton, Jovic and likely have to eat the Robinson contract but whatevs.
 
The real alternative now for a potential Westbrook dump to the Jazz offer of vets is Indiana's Buddy Hield and Myles Turner. I actually think this is a better offer than what we can give them. Unless they don't want to part ways with both picks and instead want to use just one.
 
Handlogten's Heros said:
The numbers on Barnes don't really support what you are saying. He wasn't taking many shots at all and wasn't good in the midrange... even if RJ is a poor finisher at the rim he is getting there with great frequency and its a 60% shot and not a 40% shot... also allows him to get more fouls. I think there is clearly a foundation there of something that could be good. I think defense is comparable at age 21 too.

I think his percentages are ugly but a good offensive coach helps him turn one bad rim or floater range shot into a kick out. He turns one long or mid range jumper into a three... and it doesn't make him a superstar... but he becomes pretty solid with some mild improvement as a shot maker. I just think if you took Barnes or Brown at RJ's age and said go create and increase your volume that it might not look a whole lot different.


If those picks and players are really on the table then we won't choose RJ over them. Its quite simple. Ainge ain't falling for some bait and switch. If that's the price we don't do it... full stop. I can see a world where that isn't the price... and that's the only world we would do it imo.

The example packages I'd use are:

Non-RJ
3 unprotected picks from Knicks 23/25/27 and 3 protected picks they own... plus Toppin/IQ or Grimes/McBride (Knicks choice)


RJ package
2 unprotected picks 23/28 (allows them to make their second move), 2 protected picks plus IQ or Toppin (Knicks choice).

- salary filler is the same in both so Rose/Fournier... whatevs

So the RJ cost to us one unprotected pick, 1 protected pick and one of IQ or Toppin. It opens up the ability for the Knicks to move 24/26/30 for a second big trade... in scenario #1 they would have to use RJ and their 2029 pick to get a blockbuster done.

Do the Jazz prefer to get package #1 or #2?
Do the Knicks prefer to trade package #1 or #2?
Click to expand...

The numbers do support what I'm saying with Barnes. His shot profile was fairly evenly distributed. Just a much different player stylistically. That doesn't mean he was better, but he was very different. I don't really care to further discuss who was better and by how much because it doesn't really add much to the trade discussion. What really matters is how much do the Knicks value RJ Barrett and would be the trade with or without RJ.

My personal opinion, I think the Knicks greatly prefer package #1. The difference in the packages you outlined is two picks and Grimes/McBride. That is certainly more than the 1.5 value you listed before...and I still the Knicks would think RJ is more valuable. I don't think you were wrong when you mentioned that Knicks fans want to hold onto RJ tight. His basic counting numbers are fantastic and that really boosts his trade value, or at least how I perceive it. We can discuss Barnes vs Barrett as prospects at a similar age, but truth is that those two are nowhere near each other in trade value. Barnes was putting up 10/4 and Barrett put up 20/6/4. These days, no one is that simple in their analysis, but it still matters that Barrett was a 21 year old recent top 3 pick that put up those numbers and increased them throughout the season.

It's impossible to know, but my speculation is that the Knicks see Barrett as a premium young prospect who they would be interested in giving a maximum extension. I'm very low on RJ (also low on future picks tbf), and I think it's a hard decision between the packages. I don't think the Knicks are low on RJ. They probably see Barrett closer to a 21 or 22 year old Mitchell than a 21 or 22 year old Barnes.
 
stitches said:
The real alternative now for a potential Westbrook dump to the Jazz offer of vets is Indiana's Buddy Hield and Myles Turner. I actually think this is a better offer than what we can give them. Unless they don't want to part ways with both picks and instead want to use just one.
Click to expand...

I think the Jazz can still undercut the Pacers here. We have a lot of vets the Lakers could use and I think we should be more willing to eat some value loss with our vets than the Pacers would be with Turner.
 
KqWIN said:
I think the Jazz can still undercut the Pacers here. We have a lot of vets the Lakers could use and I think we should be more willing to eat some value loss with our vets than the Pacers would be with Turner.
Click to expand...
Lakers need more role players than anything else. Utah makes more sense.
 
KqWIN said:
The numbers do support what I'm saying with Barnes. His shot profile was fairly evenly distributed. Just a much different player stylistically. That doesn't mean he was better, but he was very different. I don't really care to further discuss who was better and by how much because it doesn't really add much to the trade discussion. What really matters is how much do the Knicks value RJ Barrett and would be the trade with or without RJ.

My personal opinion, I think the Knicks greatly prefer package #1. The difference in the packages you outlined is two picks and Grimes/McBride. That is certainly more than the 1.5 value you listed before...and I still the Knicks would think RJ is more valuable.
Click to expand...
I was consistent in saying 1.5 unprotected picks... there is a difference. I stated it at least twice. 1 unprotected and 1 protected is basically 1.5 unprotected picks. Its right in line with what I stated.

Unprotected picks are worth twice as much as protected ones... I don't think that is a wild assumption.

I think the Jazz prefer package #1 too... so if they both agree you execute the deal. I think there is at least a chance that the Knicks prefer to give package #2 for the sake of flexibility. If they value him more than this, then the Jazz will very much prefer the non-RJ package.

KqWIN said:
I don't think you were wrong when you mentioned that Knicks fans want to hold onto RJ tight. His basic counting numbers are fantastic and that really boosts his trade value, or at least how I perceive it. We can discuss Barnes vs Barrett as prospects at a similar age, but truth is that those two are nowhere near each other in trade value. Barnes was putting up 10/4 and Barrett put up 20/6/4. These days, no one is that simple in their analysis, but it still matters that Barrett was a 21 year old recent top 3 pick that put up those numbers and increased them throughout the season.
Click to expand...


KqWIN said:
It's impossible to know, but my speculation is that the Knicks see Barrett as a premium young prospect who they would be interested in giving a maximum extension. I'm very low on RJ (also low on future picks tbf), and I think it's a hard decision between the packages. I don't think the Knicks are low on RJ. They probably see Barrett closer to a 21 or 22 year old Mitchell than a 21 or 22 year old Barnes.
Click to expand...
There is some hesitancy on an extension for Barrett... if that last sentence were true they would have extended him already and taken him off the table. They need RJ to play well to retain his value... That's going to be difficult with Donovan, Jalen, Randle all requiring shots too.

I think they have hit a stalemate as Ainge really only cares about unprotected picks per some reports... Knicks don't want to go to 4 and maybe Ainge won't compromise on 3... so then 2 and RJ becomes an alternative... or it becomes the selling point to the fanbase "we had to give up 4 picks but we kept RJ out". If the reporting had stayed consistent that we weren't interested in RJ then it changes the negotiations a bit. I do think Danny would settle in on 2 unprotected picks RJ and stuff or see it as at least equivalent or better than 3 unprotected picks and stuff. That is where the rubber hits the road in these negotiations.
 
Handlogten's Heros said:
I was consistent in saying 1.5 unprotected picks... there is a difference. I stated it at least twice. 1 unprotected and 1 protected is basically 1.5 unprotected picks. Its right in line with what I stated.

Unprotected picks are worth twice as much as protected ones... I don't think that is a wild assumption.

I think the Jazz prefer package #1 too... so if they both agree you execute the deal. I think there is at least a chance that the Knicks prefer to give package #2 for the sake of flexibility. If they value him more than this, then the Jazz will very much prefer the non-RJ package.





There is some hesitancy on an extension for Barrett... if that last sentence were true they would have extended him already and taken him off the table. They need RJ to play well to retain his value... That's going to be difficult with Donovan, Jalen, Randle all requiring shots too.

I think they have hit a stalemate as Ainge really only cares about unprotected picks per some reports... Knicks don't want to go to 4 and maybe Ainge won't compromise on 3... so then 2 and RJ becomes an alternative... or it becomes the selling point to the fanbase "we had to give up 4 picks but we kept RJ out". If the reporting had stayed consistent that we weren't interested in RJ then it changes the negotiations a bit. I do think Danny would settle in on 2 unprotected picks RJ and stuff or see it as at least equivalent or better than 3 unprotected picks and stuff. That is where the rubber hits the road in these negotiations.
Click to expand...

I just don't see RJ as a compromise option and I hope he's not. There is a massive delta between what I think he's actually worth and what it would cost to get him. I think Danny wants picks more than he wants players and NYK wants Barrett more than they want picks.
 
KqWIN said:
I just don't see RJ as a compromise option and I hope he's not. There is a massive delta between what I think he's actually worth and what it would cost to get him. I think Danny wants picks more than he wants players and NYK wants Barrett more than they want picks.
Click to expand...

I don't see RJ in the deal as realistic. This would create a hole at SF for the Knicks.
 
They have Reddish who has some upside and they still can deal some other players. Market is just getting started, too. Jeremy Lamb, Ben McLemore or Rodney Hood probably can be some sort of stop-gap. It's not like theyll be winning many games either way.
 
perkinsfor3 said:
They have Reddish who has some upside and they still can deal some other players. Market is just getting started, too. Jeremy Lamb, Ben McLemore or Rodney Hood probably can be some sort of stop-gap. It's not like theyll be winning many games either way.
Click to expand...

All the more reason that they wouldn't want to trade unprotected picks then. Reddish is also an unknown and not very liked by their coach. I don't think Ainge really wants to have to max out a player while rebuilding.
 
jaydhn said:
All the more reason that they wouldn't want to trade unprotected picks then. Reddish is also an unknown and not very liked by their coach. I don't think Ainge really wants to have to max out a player while rebuilding.
Click to expand...
Based on what? We will have to spend the money eventually anyways. Cap is spiking in a few years and his contact would look extremely favorable.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top