What's new
By:

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

Jingled said:
Why would the Suns take Randle?
Click to expand...
There was a rumor they want a post up 4 and Knicks fans were like... k you can have him but we need a couple picks... legit heard the Knicks film room guys say Crowder, Shamet, Craig plus a 1st enough... the other guy was like... ones enough if its unprotected.

These assholes think Don worth 2 unprotected picks but want at least one for Randle (protections on a phoenix pick need to be removed like they will be a lotto team).

No one wants Randle.
 
Elizah Huge said:
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.
Click to expand...
We have to get to the salary floor next year. We can take on 20-30M in bad salaries for picks. Other than that our cap space is going to be used on players... might as well have some good young players to use it on... call me crazy.
 
Handlogten's Heros said:
We have to get to the salary floor next year. We can take on 20-30M in bad salaries for picks. Other than that our cap space is going to be used on players... might as well have some good young players to use it on... call me crazy.
Click to expand...

Good young player on a favorable contract in a few years… you crazy ************.
 
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...
That's fine.... Knicks should value Barrett over picks. There also might be some disagreements in his extension negotiations... He might want max dollars and they might want him at a Keldon Johnson price. The RJ stuff is very clearly coming from the Knicks side... could mean a few different things.
 
On ESPN 700 this morning Andy Larsen said he still doesn't believe the reports that the Jazz are interested in RJ Barret are accurate. Everything he's heard is that Ainge doesn't want to give Barret a max contract and he'd rather have the cap space.
 
I think there's a good chance the Knicks are leaking these reports about the Jazz being interested in Barret to make themselves look good when he ends up not being in the deal.
 
Jingled said:
On ESPN 700 this morning Andy Larsen said he still doesn't believe the reports that the Jazz are interested in RJ Barret are accurate. Everything he's heard is that Ainge doesn't want to give Barret a max contract and he'd rather have the cap space.
Click to expand...
Its clearly coming from the NY side. Could mean a lot of things... either they are about to give in to Ainge's pick demands or they would prefer to put RJ in over all the extra picks.

One thing i thought... the extension negotiations could be going poorly and they put this out there to get RJ to take less... once he signs the deal he can't be in the trade. So the threat of Utah is being used against him.

I'm pretty sure its good for us this is coming out on their side but not 100% sure.
 
Not dealing RJ and giving up extra picks severely hinders the next move they’d be able to make.
 
TheStormofWar said:
Not necessarily a bad proposition. Remember, OKC owns our first in '24 with a top 10 protection that we'd dearly like back.
Click to expand...
That isn’t going to convey so we dodged a bullet there. I get the sentiment but I’d much rather have RJ and we’d still have plenty of COA space to do that.
 
stitches said:
If you could have RJ or 27 unprotected and 29 top 5 protected. What would you choose?
Click to expand...
I'm not sure which way I will pick but hi-five setting the line cuz that is it imo.

I'd lean towards the picks... I think NY is hesitant to add the 4th unprotected pick.
 
stitches said:
If you could have RJ or 27 unprotected and 29 top 5 protected. What would you choose?
Click to expand...
I don’t think it’s that simple but I would take RJ in that scenario.

Now if you tell me the deal is:

23/25/27/29 1sts plus two protected 1sts plus our choice of two of Toppin/Grimes/Quickley

or

23/25 1sts plus two protected 1sts plus Barrett

I would be more inclined to take the first deal. It all depends on the rest of the package. If I get those two picks you mentioned plus 2 of the 3 young guys we like vs Barrett I’ll take the picks and players.
 
Elizah Huge said:
I don’t think it’s that simple but I would take RJ in that scenario.

Now if you tell me the deal is:

23/25/27/29 1sts plus two protected 1sts plus our choice of two of Toppin/Grimes/Quickley

or

23/25 1sts plus two protected 1sts plus Barrett

I would be more inclined to take the first deal. It all depends on the rest of the package. If I get those two picks you mentioned plus 2 of the 3 young guys we like vs Barrett I’ll take the picks and players.
Click to expand...
It also depends on the contract demands. If we knew RJ would take 5/150M I do it then the decision gets tougher. If he is stuck wanting 5/188M... I'm probably taking the picks.
 
Handlogten's Heros said:
It also depends on the contract demands. If we knew RJ would take 5/150M I do it then the decision gets tougher. If he is stuck wanting 5/188M... I'm probably taking the picks.
Click to expand...

I wouldn’t be opposed to 5/185 if we front loaded it. I don’t think it’s that big of a deal if that’s what he wanted. This might be a silly discussion in 2 years when that contract looks like a steal.
 
Elizah Huge said:
I wouldn’t be opposed to 5/185 if we front loaded it. I don’t think it’s that big of a deal if that’s what he wanted. This might be a silly discussion in 2 years when that contract looks like a steal.
Click to expand...
Can't front load that amount though... 5/188 is the max.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top