What's new
By:

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

Handlogten's Heros said:
Players generally don’t want to go into a market alone. Even LA. So they need to get someone to team up with and need to be FA at the same time. They could pull a Heat Big Three type of move… I’ll bet against it. They lost out on Lemarcus Aldridge in embarrassing fashion. Maybe they can retool quickly once Lebron fades out… but the fact that it will likely be a slow fade might work well as they don’t ever save up the assets to retool quickly.

Even with Lebron they have hit the lotto twice.

The other factor here… FA don’t hit FA like they used to with all the extensions. They usually extend them get traded… if there is nothing in the cupboard to trade then how does LA fully participate in FA… like how the Clips got Kawhi and PG? Assume Lakers will always be good because of beaches and sunshine is stupid.
Click to expand...
2027 and 2029 are an eternity away, and so there are really too many possibilities to predict what will happen. There will be a cap jump and a new CBA between now and then.

I don't think this is what you are saying, and so I'm not arguing with you, but to disregard the advantage that LA has in building a team, based on their location would also be stupid.
 
SoberasHotRod said:
2027 and 2029 are an eternity away, and so there are really too many possibilities to predict what will happen. There will be a cap jump and a new CBA between now and then.

I don't think this is what you are saying, and so I'm not arguing with you, but to disregard the advantage that LA has in building a team, based on their location would also be stupid.
Click to expand...
Exactly… it’s a 50/50 proposition that could have a huge payoff. Teams don’t give unprotected picks that far in the future unless they believe they have something to hang their hat on. Minny did it cuz they believe they will be great for a long time… Miami would do it cuz culture… la does it because beaches and sunshine… none of those things are certain. I have little faith in the current Laker management/ownership.
 
NUMBERICA said:
Also, when was the last time the Lakers were good without Lebron? Given their ownership disaster and that he’s gonna likely be exiting in some form or fashion, I’m not sure there’s a better bet on unprotected picks hitting than those picks.
Click to expand...
Don't worry, some other star seeking the limelight and legacy of a Lakers team will take his place. It will be a few years of ****, then another star seeking their redemption will partner up with other stars and form another super-team in LA and get another ring or 2. It is just the way the ****ed up NBA goes.
 
Just another idea to toss in here:

-'23 and '26 unprotected
-'23 Mavs (protected) pick
-'25 and '27 super swaps (Knicks receive the worst of all the picks owned by the Jazz)
-'28 protected else swaps in '28 and '29

That last part is the thing I think is interesting if even possible. The idea here is that if the pick falls into the protected range (say it's #7 and it's top-10 protected), then the Jazz have swap rights (meaning they would still get #7 but send their later pick that year) and get the next year's, too. This would mean that the Knicks could not tank out of owing a high pick but it could be sold as a protected pick to save face but it would actually advantage the Jazz.

The headline/summary of the trade is "Knicks acquire star Donovan Mitchell for four 1st round picks". The first layer of details are that they are 'two unprotected 1st round picks (what's being floated as their current offer), two protected first round picks, and swaps."

I'm just trying to think creatively so as to make the parties as comfortable as possible to get this ****er done.
 
NUMBERICA said:
Just another idea to toss in here:

-'23 and '26 unprotected
-'23 Mavs (protected) pick
-'25 and '27 super swaps (Knicks receive the worst of all the picks owned by the Jazz)
-'28 protected else swaps in '28 and '29

That last part is the thing I think is interesting if even possible. The idea here is that if the pick falls into the protected range (say it's #7 and it's top-10 protected), then the Jazz have swap rights (meaning they would still get #7 but send their later pick that year) and get the next year's, too. This would mean that the Knicks could not tank out of owing a high pick but it could be sold as a protected pick to save face but it would actually advantage the Jazz.

The headline/summary of the trade is "Knicks acquire star Donovan Mitchell for four 1st round picks". The first layer of details are that they are 'two unprotected 1st round picks (what's being floated as their current offer), two protected first round picks, and swaps."

I'm just trying to think creatively so as to make the parties as comfortable as possible to get this ****er done.
Click to expand...

It’s just not enough unless Barrett was coming back in the deal with these picks. I like where your head is at though.
 
I could see 23/26/28 being the unprotected picks we get back so the Knicks could use their 24/30 picks in a deal in the future after this year.

We also diversify a little bit since we already have Minnesota’s 27/29. We’d have two 1sts in every draft from 2025 to 2029. That’s ****ing wild.
 
Elizah Huge said:
I could see 23/26/28 being the unprotected picks we get back so the Knicks could use their 24/30 picks in a deal in the future after this year.

We also diversify a little bit since we already have Minnesota’s 27/29. We’d have two 1sts in every draft from 2025 to 2029. That’s ****ing wild.
Click to expand...
That's kind of the more simple scenario I was working from and basically functions the same. Just nudges the optics the Knicks way and the practical value the Jazz's way.
 
NUMBERICA said:
That's kind of the more simple scenario I was working from and basically functions the same. Just nudges the optics the Knicks way and the practical value the Jazz's way.
Click to expand...

I like yours I feel like we’d need 2 of the other 3 remaining protected picks they have included though.
 
Elizah Huge said:
I like yours I feel like we’d need 2 of the other 3 remaining protected picks they have included though.
Click to expand...
That would be great. I just feel like figuring out the particulars of the Knicks picks is the domino that has to fall first and the rest of the stuff (protected picks, which players they are sending) is easier to negotiate.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top