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

[Elizah Huge]

Looking at the deal from Minnesota, I’d start with that and then hold out for better value across the board.

23/25/27 picks unprotected
29 pick (top 5 protected)
23 pick from Dallas (top 10 protected)
26/28 pick swaps
Quickley, Grimes and Toppin (plus Fournier for salary matching purposes)

That’s one extra draft pick, one extra pick swap and better value on the 3 players coming back
Quickley, Grimes & Toppin > Bolmaro, Kessler & Vanderbilt

I like it.

 

[Ferguson_Mellochill]

Is there any free agents in 2023 that are buddies with Mitchell or good enough to turn NY around? I dont think RJ and Mitchell make them a good team. They would need another star there. I guess maybe a Lebron signing could be huge, but unlikely. Also I dont know how good Lebron will be wont he be 40 by then? haha. I guess they could go after like Wiggins and another players. Robinson is decent center for them but also doesnt space the floor much. Randle sucks, but maybe he gets hot again from 3 like 2 years ago and helps them with a core of Mitchell, RJ, FA, Randle or other FA, and Robinson. That could be a solid team for a few years in the East.

Not really. Someone like D'lo Russell or Kyle Kuzma won't change who the Knicks are. Knicks should also be capped out with Randle, Mitchell and Brunson deals weighing on their books.

 

[Elizah Huge]

Not really. Someone like D'lo Russell or Kyle Kuzma won't change who the Knicks are. Knicks should also be capped out with Randle, Mitchell and Brunson deals weighing on their books.

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.

 

[yamers]

View: https://twitter.com/_Talkin_NBA/status/1547667300018335747?s=20&t=poQEqwuqqSzjJmUwO5LyYw

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

I mean, I had plenty of reasons why including the thing that differentiates the two. But sure, because I said so. We can throw out the entire conversation because "I said so".

You also indicate it’s the most valuable pick… then why the **** don’t we get it… the Knicks picks are the steak of this meal. The compromise on those picks was we let them keep Barrett. It’s what 10% more valuable than 27… but is off limits? Nah… if they were that concerned they would put some protections on the other picks.

It’s just weird for the Knicks to be like… we will give all this other stuff but that 2029 pick absolutely not… there’s too much that can happen in 2028 and 2029. For the Jazz I’d honestly pass on 2 out of three of Quickley/Grimes/Toppin if I had to… those picks are more important than the young side piece players.

 

[yamers]

i think you're about to see the new york knicks give a historic draft picks package for mitchell. THey need a star and they need it now, a young star at that.

 

[dong2ha]

Believe in ainge

Sent from my SM-G977N using JazzFanz mobile app

 

[mongoose01]

i think you're about to see the new york knicks give a historic draft picks package for mitchell. THey need a star and they need it now, a young star at that.

Meanwhile KD is crying because nobody is offering a historical amount of pics for him.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Coach Ellis]

Meanwhile KD is crying because nobody is offering a historical amount of pics for him.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Jazz going to draw blood from the Knicks, while the Nets are going to sell off KD and Kyrie for nickles on the dollar.

Watch and see - they’ll either end up taking the Heat’s deal built around Herro or the Suns deal built around Bridges.

 

[yamers]

well because KD has a history of being a little bitch and Kyrie...well that's just a whole story in it self. Mitchell is way younger and is not in his prime yet, I think you'll see it happen. Ainge is going to get a historic package and the knicks have no choice but to do it, but thats because they need the star power now and mitchell can net them other players in free agency for the next 8-10yrs.

 

[KqWIN]

You also indicate it’s the most valuable pick… then why the **** don’t we get it… the Knicks picks are the steak of this meal. The compromise on those picks was we let them keep Barrett. It’s what 10% more valuable than 27… but is off limits? Nah… if they were that concerned they would put some protections on the other picks.

It’s just weird for the Knicks to be like… we will give all this other stuff but that 2029 pick absolutely not… there’s too much that can happen in 2028 and 2029. For the Jazz I’d honestly pass on 2 out of three of Quickley/Grimes/Toppin if I had to… those picks are more important than the young side piece players.

It's the uncertainty of the pick that makes me think it's less likely to get traded. The more distant a pick, the more uncertain it is. The more uncertain an asset is, the more difficult it is to include it in the trade. It's more difficult to pin what you're giving up or what you're getting. If the deal can get done without it, it's more likely. This deal can get done without it, so I don't think it will be included. The difference between this situation and the MIN situation is that a deal could not get done without 2029 because MIN was holding onto McDaniels very tight.

It's not necessarily that the Jazz don't value the pick or that the Knicks think that pick is a deal breaker, it's just that there is a more simple deal that both teams will agree to and it's more likely that it gets done IMO.

 

[Shad]

Man, I really hope we get Quickley, Toppin, and Grimes. Just watch and look up their stats. They'd be more fun to cheer on than our team last year for sure.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

It's the uncertainty of the pick that makes me think it's less likely to get traded. The more distant a pick, the more uncertain it is. The more uncertain an asset is, the more difficult it is to include it in the trade. It's more difficult to pin what you're giving up or what you're getting. If the deal can get done without it, it's more likely. This deal can get done without it, so I don't think it will be included. The difference between this situation and the MIN situation is that a deal could not get done without 2029 because MIN was holding onto McDaniels very tight.

It's not necessarily that the Jazz don't value the pick or that the Knicks think that pick is a deal breaker, it's just that there is a more simple deal that both teams will agree to and it's more likely that it gets done IMO.

Neither of us know that the deal can or can’t get done without it… what we do know…

-Jazz are prioritizing picks
- the Knicks need to keep young players that can help them now.
-Knicks will desperately need wings and shooting… given the size and defensive abilities of their backcourt
-Knicks will be capped out so cheap production is helpful.
- we are tanking the next 2 years or more and getting a value deal is less important as we will have infinity cap space and production is less important.

So you think the teams with those goals decide it’s better for NY to get a conscience on one of the naked picks they are sending out and let a potential 3 and D wing go instead… and the Jazz will forego that super valuable pick and take the player instead… why would that be the outcome and common ground they find when it runs counterintuitive to the teams goals?

 

[Bawse Dawg]

Reddit comment:

This whole thing is really starting to smell like a classic Ainge trade that gets discussed endlessly but never happens.

Every Ainge trade comes out of nowhere. The ones that are discussed endlessly in the media never happen.

I think he’s dealing with another team and just trying to drive the price up on Mitchell.

I do remember that happening a lot with the Celtics..

 

[Release the Kraken]

It appears the tank is on, with or without Mitchell. I approve.

I’m fine with a one or two year rebuild but anything more than that and I’m losing interest big time.

 

[KqWIN]

Neither of us know that the deal can or can’t get done without it… what we do know…

-Jazz are prioritizing picks
- the Knicks need to keep young players that can help them now.
-Knicks will desperately need wings and shooting… given the size and defensive abilities of their backcourt
-Knicks will be capped out so cheap production is helpful.
- we are tanking the next 2 years or more and getting a value deal is less important as we will have infinity cap space and production is less important.

So you think the teams with those goals decide it’s better for NY to get a conscience on one of the naked picks they are sending out and let a potential 3 and D wing go instead… and the Jazz will forego that super valuable pick and take the player instead… why would that be the outcome and common ground they find when it runs counterintuitive to the teams goals?

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.

 

[mdalby]

What is the ranking of the Knicks players that we want to get back in the trade, if we exclude RJ Barrett?

- Quickley
- Toppin
- Grimes
- McBride

 

[mhindy]

I would have it something like:
Grimes
Toppin


Quickley

McBride

 

[stitches]

It will stop happening sometime in the near future.

Somewhere around 2029 when the Jazz would have already had 2 top 5 picks in 2027 from NYK and MIN and would be about to have another 2 top 10 picks from NYK and MIN

 

[stitches]

I think I would value the 2029 NYK unprotected higher than any combination of 2 of DET 2023, DAL 2023, WAS 2023, MKE 2025. If two of those are included I would rather have NYK 2029 unprotected.