What's new
By:
Filters

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

KqWIN said:
I simply think that a deal is easier to work out without the pick involved because the pick is difficult to value. It's easier for two teams to say yes without the pick than it is with it. I don't think the Knicks want to give up Grimes either, but I also don't think they'll let go of that pick either. What was it, 3 days ago you were blasting me telling me the Knicks wouldn't even beat MIA's offer??? Part of your reasoning was that the Knicks wouldn't be happy to give up their distant picks. I agree with that. So if you want some reasoning as to why it's difficult to have NYK give that pick up, refer to your own reasoning. I get the reasoning that NYK is more likely to value players and UTA is more likely to value picks, but I still think the uncertainty and difficulty in valuing that pick makes it difficult to include in a trade.

It's hard to value that pick, if you don't think it's difficult to value a pick 7 years from now, agree to disagree. When things are difficult to value it makes them more difficult to trade. I know you really, really want that pick. I'm not telling you that it's wrong, I just think it's harder to build a trade with something that's difficult to value. I think both sides know how they feel about Grimes, and I think there's a trade with Grimes in it that both say yes to. They may also both say yes to a deal without Grimes and the pick instead, but it's more difficult to land on that conclusion IMO. It's my feeling that when things have ambiguous value, they are harder to work into a trade. There's a reason why picks that are more recent or made less ambiguous by protections are more often traded than distant picks with maximum ambiguity. Usually when picks so far in the distance are included, it's because that's all a team has outside of their untouchables. The Knicks are not in that situation. If it is included when the trade comes down, feel free to call me a dumbass. I don't really have anything else to say at this point so we'll just wait see what happens.
Click to expand...
Yes, it is EASIER to work out a deal without the 2029 pick involved, because it would mean the Jazz have given up leverage. Why would the Jazz do that when they have ALL THE LEVERAGE in the world? Ainge's job is not to make this trade easier to do. It's to get the best possible return and the 2029 pick is one of the premier assets in this deal. Of course the Knicks wouldn't want to include it. Just like they wouldn't want to include any of the good stuff in that deal. If it were up to the Knicks they would give up the 4 protected picks + 2 of their own and Randle+Fournier. But we should not be aiming at what's easier for the Knicks to stomach. Get everything you can possibly get, the best stuff... the stuff that can actually turn into something good. And if they are not willing to do it. Let them be in the 9th-10th seed in December and we can revisit. Or deal with a team that's actually willing to give you more valuable pieces than the Knicks.

First it was Barrett is a non-starter... then it became Quickley and Topin are untouchable... now we are haggling over whether we should let them get away with not including Grimes and the 2029 pick. NO! We should NOT let them get away with not including some of the most valuable possible pieces. Press until they cave... or make another team cave. It's not like we have to do that deal by next week.
 
I would ask for a 2029 top 3 protected pick swap that is usable against any pick from 20 or lower. To use it, the Jazz would need to acquire the 19th, 20th pick in the draft. But if the Knicks win the lottery it is theirs. This gives them some assurance that if it is an awesome pick then they have it. Also, if it is a moderately great pick, it can't be worse than the 20th pick.
 
whatthe said:
I would ask for a 2029 top 3 protected pick swap that is usable against any pick from 20 or lower. To use it, the Jazz would need to acquire the 19th, 20th pick in the draft. But if the Knicks win the lottery it is theirs. This gives them some assurance that if it is an awesome pick then they have it. Also, if it is a moderately great pick, it can't be worse than the 20th pick.
Click to expand...
And I would make it more exotic. The pick swap only works if you have a pick that is 20th or better and a second rounder 35th or better. Alot of teams value a high 2nd rounder stronger that a 1st round pick.

So hypothetically, if we have the Minnesota pick at 18th, and the Knicks had the 9th pick, the Jazz would only need to get a 35th or better to get the 9th pick.

The Knicks could then trade the 18th pick and the 35th pick to get the 30th pick for the best financial pick. Or they can keep both picks.
 
Last edited:
How is Barrett Mitchell and Brunson all going to be on the floor at the same time
None of them can play small forward
 
Warning: Long Post

For the past 2 days, I’ve been having a heated argument with myself over whether or not I even wanna see RJ Barrett included in the Donovan deal (tanking will do funny things to a guy). To be fair to me, I think I had some pretty great points on both sides. Here’s where I’ve landed:

- On one hand, Barrett’s a guy the Jazz would have to make a pretty quick decision on considering that whomever he’s playing for next season is gonna have to pony up a $100 million contract for and considering we’ll just be finishing up year 1 of the tank to end all tanks (hopefully), would be even fit our rebuild timeline? That’s an important question considering that including him in the deal will cost us some draft capital.

But……

- On the other hand, this kid is only 21 years old, was talented enough to be the #2 overall pick 3 years ago and measures at 6’6” tall. Now hang in there with me as I go on a semi-rant about his height. As we have just witnessed FIRST HAND, the quickest way to botch true title contention for a young and talented core in today’s NBA is to trot out a 6 foot tall starting back court. Yes Barrett can play the 2 or the 3, but count me in as a HUGE fan of the Jazz acquiring Barrett and planting him firmly at shooting guard. At this point, any Jazz fan should salivate at the prospect of having some legit backcourt size. Add to that the fact that I think this kid’s ceiling might end up being as high as Donovan’s. At 21, he’s currently gonna give you 20 pts/6 rebs/3 ast per night. Donovan’s age 21 season (his rookie year btw), he was good for 20.5/4/4. Plus, paying him is going to be pretty painless for the Jazz considering what this roster construction is going to look like once Tankathon officially gets underway. Timeline wise I think he fits. If the Jazz do this right and catch a few breaks along the way, we should be a playoff team when Barrett is 24-25 years old. That actually lines up pretty damn well.

Bottom line: The Knicks aren’t going to do the Donovan deal while keeping both Julius Randall and Barrett on their roster. They’ll have to pay RJ after the coming season and they’re gonna have a real hard time moving Randall’s contract somewhere else if they can’t get the Jazz to bail them out. So since they decided to throw stupid money at Jalen Brunson, they absolutely have to get one of those guys off their books as part of the Donovan deal. In no way, shape, or form should the Jazz help NY get out from under Randall. I know Ainge LOVES him some draft picks, but the Jazz should be willing to leave one on the table if it can land them Barrett.

The Rudy deal yielded lots of draft capital, but zero young stars. IMO, Barrett represents the only attainable piece in the potential Donovan deal that represents getting a player back that has “Big 3” potential.
 
mongoose01 said:
We let the knicks keep Bryant, so give up your picks already.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Conspiracy theory on

Oh, Jazz didn't hire Bryant because if he is on the Knicks, Mitchell would want to be there more.

Conspiracy theory off.
 
Elizah Huge said:
Yeah, they’d have 109M committed to Mitchell, Brunson, Randle, Robinson and Hartenstein alone.

Barrett is also going to get an extension. They won’t have any cap space to sign anyone for more than the MLE.
Click to expand...

Yessssss (twiddling my fingers) let’s get those picks!!!


Sent from my iPhone using JazzFanz
 
Saint Cy of JFC said:
A trade is 100% going to happen within the next 7 months.
Click to expand...
No doubt. Just having the "Almost traded for" warning bells going off after the story from Andy about the deal "almost" going through on Tuesday until the Knicks backed off.

ppf-lol.gif
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top