Knicks · Is D-Mitch The Guy? (page 5)
GustavBahler wrote:My concern with a Brunson/Mitchell backcourt is it working out like it did for Houston with CP3/Harden. Not being a good fit together, despite the talent. Sometimes it comes down to chemistry.
My understanding of the CP3/Harden pairing was that Harden was a-hole at the time. He refused to cut when CP3 had the ball and hurt the offense. Mitchell does gets tunnel vision from time to time, but he and Brunson have showed the ability to play off ball. My biggest concern is on the defensive end.
BigDaddyG wrote:GustavBahler wrote:My concern with a Brunson/Mitchell backcourt is it working out like it did for Houston with CP3/Harden. Not being a good fit together, despite the talent. Sometimes it comes down to chemistry.My understanding of the CP3/Harden pairing was that Harden was a-hole at the time. He refused to cut when CP3 had the ball and hurt the offense. Mitchell does gets tunnel vision from time to time, but he and Brunson have showed the ability to play off ball. My biggest concern is on the defensive end.
Its the tunnel vision that concerns me, as a source of friction. Since Brunson can also get buckets. Two NYers coming home, both wanting to make their mark. This is by no means a prediction.
GustavBahler wrote:BigDaddyG wrote:GustavBahler wrote:My concern with a Brunson/Mitchell backcourt is it working out like it did for Houston with CP3/Harden. Not being a good fit together, despite the talent. Sometimes it comes down to chemistry.My understanding of the CP3/Harden pairing was that Harden was a-hole at the time. He refused to cut when CP3 had the ball and hurt the offense. Mitchell does gets tunnel vision from time to time, but he and Brunson have showed the ability to play off ball. My biggest concern is on the defensive end.
Its the tunnel vision that concerns me, as a source of friction. Since Brunson can also get buckets. Two NYers coming home, both wanting to make their mark. This is by no means a prediction.
Clyde says the same things about him and Pearl, right?
GustavBahler wrote:My concern with a Brunson/Mitchell backcourt is it working out like it did for Houston with CP3/Harden. Not being a good fit together, despite the talent. Sometimes it comes down to chemistry.
The nets are another cautionary tale. “Oh they’ll be fine. KD won a championship with a shoot first pg Steph Curry.”
Not that Brunson is a shoot first pg. he’s not but Mitchell absolutely is and then you’ve got the perennial black hole Randle who we are stuck with minimum 2 more years
martin wrote:GustavBahler wrote:BigDaddyG wrote:GustavBahler wrote:My concern with a Brunson/Mitchell backcourt is it working out like it did for Houston with CP3/Harden. Not being a good fit together, despite the talent. Sometimes it comes down to chemistry.My understanding of the CP3/Harden pairing was that Harden was a-hole at the time. He refused to cut when CP3 had the ball and hurt the offense. Mitchell does gets tunnel vision from time to time, but he and Brunson have showed the ability to play off ball. My biggest concern is on the defensive end.
Its the tunnel vision that concerns me, as a source of friction. Since Brunson can also get buckets. Two NYers coming home, both wanting to make their mark. This is by no means a prediction.
Clyde says the same things about him and Pearl, right?
Thought of that as well, but they weren't NYers. Not at first. Doubt either wants to be "robin" in an all-NY backcourt. Not at MSG.
The way to overcome that trap, would be for them to embrace their NY roots collectively from the start. We've had our share of NY products play for the Knicks. Too often they go Diva. If there is a Brunson/Mitchell backcourt, hope they make sure to communicate from the start. Get on the same page, and work to stay on the same page.
Philc1 wrote:GustavBahler wrote:My concern with a Brunson/Mitchell backcourt is it working out like it did for Houston with CP3/Harden. Not being a good fit together, despite the talent. Sometimes it comes down to chemistry.The nets are another cautionary tale. “Oh they’ll be fine. KD won a championship with a shoot first pg Steph Curry.”
Not that Brunson is a shoot first pg. he’s not but Mitchell absolutely is and then you’ve got the perennial black hole Randle who we are stuck with minimum 2 more years
Randle dribbling into a 1 on 5. Jacking up shots, was a black hole. But there is "multiverse Randle", as Rookie put it. That Randle knows when he is starting to become a black hole, and shares the rock. Randle has more help, maybe he wont feel the need to dominate the ball.
BigDaddyG wrote:GustavBahler wrote:My concern with a Brunson/Mitchell backcourt is it working out like it did for Houston with CP3/Harden. Not being a good fit together, despite the talent. Sometimes it comes down to chemistry.My understanding of the CP3/Harden pairing was that Harden was a-hole at the time. He refused to cut when CP3 had the ball and hurt the offense. Mitchell does gets tunnel vision from time to time, but he and Brunson have showed the ability to play off ball. My biggest concern is on the defensive end.
I seem to recall that pairing was quite successful but unsustainable personalities. 80-22 in games played over two seasons. Injuries were also an issue.
His childhood years were in Westchester. Not being picky, but this NYC thing is not that important.
DM got his NY metro area roots and summers here.
First and foremost they have to compliment each other and I can see it being an adjustment. Earl and Clyde did sacrifice. Especially Clyde. Earl had some injurie issues early in his tenure but aged better than Clyde whose knees failed him.
Today with Free agency/cap space as it is I wonder how those two might have reacted to each other let alone that trade even gets done given contract status and years left.
Im on the fence with DM/Brunson pairing. I’d hope Thibs, Johnny Bryant and Daddy Rick have pondered it and gave Leon the feedback. Same with DM as to if he is game. If it comes together I assume its not Dolan making the call. He has to approve it for sure, but I hope its a basketball decision first and foremost.
Nalod wrote:BigDaddyG wrote:GustavBahler wrote:My concern with a Brunson/Mitchell backcourt is it working out like it did for Houston with CP3/Harden. Not being a good fit together, despite the talent. Sometimes it comes down to chemistry.My understanding of the CP3/Harden pairing was that Harden was a-hole at the time. He refused to cut when CP3 had the ball and hurt the offense. Mitchell does gets tunnel vision from time to time, but he and Brunson have showed the ability to play off ball. My biggest concern is on the defensive end.
I seem to recall that pairing was quite successful but unsustainable personalities. 80-22 in games played over two seasons. Injuries were also an issue.
It was a lot of things. Harden had a historic scoring season and carried the offense itself to great heights. But the backcourt fit itself was clunky. Paul himself admitted injuries played a part. But there were also rumors out there that Paul was frustrated with Harden's disinterest in the offense when the ball was out of his hands.
https://www.sportscasting.com/chris-paul...
You have to be able to have them conversations. And the thing that frustrated me the most was that first year, I wasn’t healthy. It’s crazy. Them years in Houston are kinda a blur, to a certain extent, because there was so much going on at the time. But dang, we was good. We was real good.And James, I still say it, can’t nobody score the ball like he can. It’s crazy, man. I wouldn’t trade any experience or whatnot, but I wish we would’ve had some of those conversations. But most of all, I wish I would’ve been able to stay healthy.
BigDaddyG wrote:Nalod wrote:BigDaddyG wrote:GustavBahler wrote:My concern with a Brunson/Mitchell backcourt is it working out like it did for Houston with CP3/Harden. Not being a good fit together, despite the talent. Sometimes it comes down to chemistry.My understanding of the CP3/Harden pairing was that Harden was a-hole at the time. He refused to cut when CP3 had the ball and hurt the offense. Mitchell does gets tunnel vision from time to time, but he and Brunson have showed the ability to play off ball. My biggest concern is on the defensive end.
I seem to recall that pairing was quite successful but unsustainable personalities. 80-22 in games played over two seasons. Injuries were also an issue.
It was a lot of things. Harden had a historic scoring season and carried the offense itself to great heights. But the backcourt fit itself was clunky. Paul himself admitted injuries played a part. But there were also rumors out there that Paul was frustrated with Harden's disinterest in the offense when the ball was out of his hands.
https://www.sportscasting.com/chris-paul...
You have to be able to have them conversations. And the thing that frustrated me the most was that first year, I wasn’t healthy. It’s crazy. Them years in Houston are kinda a blur, to a certain extent, because there was so much going on at the time. But dang, we was good. We was real good.And James, I still say it, can’t nobody score the ball like he can. It’s crazy, man. I wouldn’t trade any experience or whatnot, but I wish we would’ve had some of those conversations. But most of all, I wish I would’ve been able to stay healthy.
Your right. That 80-22 was indication it could have worked. Both Head strong alphas and one had to go.
Both of DM and Brunson are young. If it don't work, and they playing well but chemistry is not there then you can trade one and keep pushing the rock up the hill.
No guarantee of anything. Not in the picks accumulated will pan out, or the health of the players.
"price is only an issue in the absence of quality"......Thus if we make this deal and lose more it will suck. If it elevates the team over the next 4 years, and there will always be more changes perhaps, then we'll be happy.
Ainge is not part of our happiness unless we suck and they succeed.
BigDaddyG wrote:Nalod wrote:BigDaddyG wrote:GustavBahler wrote:My concern with a Brunson/Mitchell backcourt is it working out like it did for Houston with CP3/Harden. Not being a good fit together, despite the talent. Sometimes it comes down to chemistry.My understanding of the CP3/Harden pairing was that Harden was a-hole at the time. He refused to cut when CP3 had the ball and hurt the offense. Mitchell does gets tunnel vision from time to time, but he and Brunson have showed the ability to play off ball. My biggest concern is on the defensive end.
I seem to recall that pairing was quite successful but unsustainable personalities. 80-22 in games played over two seasons. Injuries were also an issue.
It was a lot of things. Harden had a historic scoring season and carried the offense itself to great heights. But the backcourt fit itself was clunky. Paul himself admitted injuries played a part. But there were also rumors out there that Paul was frustrated with Harden's disinterest in the offense when the ball was out of his hands.
https://www.sportscasting.com/chris-paul...
You have to be able to have them conversations. And the thing that frustrated me the most was that first year, I wasn’t healthy. It’s crazy. Them years in Houston are kinda a blur, to a certain extent, because there was so much going on at the time. But dang, we was good. We was real good.And James, I still say it, can’t nobody score the ball like he can. It’s crazy, man. I wouldn’t trade any experience or whatnot, but I wish we would’ve had some of those conversations. But most of all, I wish I would’ve been able to stay healthy.
Speaks to my point about communicating from the start. Sometimes we assume that this happens automatically, because they're pros. Amar'e and Melo made no real effort to develop a two-man game.
Hopefully getting on the same page will be a point of emphasis.
GustavBahler wrote:BigDaddyG wrote:Nalod wrote:BigDaddyG wrote:GustavBahler wrote:My concern with a Brunson/Mitchell backcourt is it working out like it did for Houston with CP3/Harden. Not being a good fit together, despite the talent. Sometimes it comes down to chemistry.My understanding of the CP3/Harden pairing was that Harden was a-hole at the time. He refused to cut when CP3 had the ball and hurt the offense. Mitchell does gets tunnel vision from time to time, but he and Brunson have showed the ability to play off ball. My biggest concern is on the defensive end.
I seem to recall that pairing was quite successful but unsustainable personalities. 80-22 in games played over two seasons. Injuries were also an issue.
It was a lot of things. Harden had a historic scoring season and carried the offense itself to great heights. But the backcourt fit itself was clunky. Paul himself admitted injuries played a part. But there were also rumors out there that Paul was frustrated with Harden's disinterest in the offense when the ball was out of his hands.
https://www.sportscasting.com/chris-paul...
You have to be able to have them conversations. And the thing that frustrated me the most was that first year, I wasn’t healthy. It’s crazy. Them years in Houston are kinda a blur, to a certain extent, because there was so much going on at the time. But dang, we was good. We was real good.And James, I still say it, can’t nobody score the ball like he can. It’s crazy, man. I wouldn’t trade any experience or whatnot, but I wish we would’ve had some of those conversations. But most of all, I wish I would’ve been able to stay healthy.
Speaks to my point about communicating from the start. Sometimes we assume that this happens automatically, because they're pros. Amar'e and Melo made no real effort to develop a two-man game.
Hopefully getting on the same page will be a point of emphasis.
Don't think comparing Harden/CP to DM/Brunson is relavent. Think Harden is NOTHING like DM or Brunson. DM/Brunson have no history of personality issues, ego problems or trouble dealing with team mates. All things Harden has had everywhere he has played. DM has shown to be able to play off the ball and if you watched Jazz games was good at playing in the flow. So I disagree with the notion that he won't be able to share the ball with anyone here. Brunson has played very well with one of the most ball dominant players in the league, So do not see why he won't be able to do so with DM as well.
Do not think the question is if it would be good idea to add DM to the team but rather what would be a fair price to get him. If we do not overpay, he will be a hell of an addition.
Surprised that suggesting the importance of communication from the start, would get any kind of an argument. Just because they dont
have a history, doesnt mean instant chemistry. Staying on the same page is a process, best started early.
HofstraBBall wrote:GustavBahler wrote:BigDaddyG wrote:Nalod wrote:BigDaddyG wrote:GustavBahler wrote:My concern with a Brunson/Mitchell backcourt is it working out like it did for Houston with CP3/Harden. Not being a good fit together, despite the talent. Sometimes it comes down to chemistry.My understanding of the CP3/Harden pairing was that Harden was a-hole at the time. He refused to cut when CP3 had the ball and hurt the offense. Mitchell does gets tunnel vision from time to time, but he and Brunson have showed the ability to play off ball. My biggest concern is on the defensive end.
I seem to recall that pairing was quite successful but unsustainable personalities. 80-22 in games played over two seasons. Injuries were also an issue.
It was a lot of things. Harden had a historic scoring season and carried the offense itself to great heights. But the backcourt fit itself was clunky. Paul himself admitted injuries played a part. But there were also rumors out there that Paul was frustrated with Harden's disinterest in the offense when the ball was out of his hands.
https://www.sportscasting.com/chris-paul...
You have to be able to have them conversations. And the thing that frustrated me the most was that first year, I wasn’t healthy. It’s crazy. Them years in Houston are kinda a blur, to a certain extent, because there was so much going on at the time. But dang, we was good. We was real good.And James, I still say it, can’t nobody score the ball like he can. It’s crazy, man. I wouldn’t trade any experience or whatnot, but I wish we would’ve had some of those conversations. But most of all, I wish I would’ve been able to stay healthy.
Speaks to my point about communicating from the start. Sometimes we assume that this happens automatically, because they're pros. Amar'e and Melo made no real effort to develop a two-man game.
Hopefully getting on the same page will be a point of emphasis.
Don't think comparing Harden/CP to DM/Brunson is relavent. Think Harden is NOTHING like DM or Brunson. DM/Brunson have no history of personality issues, ego problems or trouble dealing with team mates. All things Harden has had everywhere he has played. DM has shown to be able to play off the ball and if you watched Jazz games was good at playing in the flow. So I disagree with the notion that he won't be able to share the ball with anyone here. Brunson has played very well with one of the most ball dominant players in the league, So do not see why he won't be able to do so with DM as well.
Do not think the question is if it would be good idea to add DM to the team but rather what would be a fair price to get him. If we do not overpay, he will be a hell of an addition.
GustavBahler wrote:Philc1 wrote:GustavBahler wrote:My concern with a Brunson/Mitchell backcourt is it working out like it did for Houston with CP3/Harden. Not being a good fit together, despite the talent. Sometimes it comes down to chemistry.The nets are another cautionary tale. “Oh they’ll be fine. KD won a championship with a shoot first pg Steph Curry.”
Not that Brunson is a shoot first pg. he’s not but Mitchell absolutely is and then you’ve got the perennial black hole Randle who we are stuck with minimum 2 more yearsRandle dribbling into a 1 on 5. Jacking up shots, was a black hole. But there is "multiverse Randle", as Rookie put it. That Randle knows when he is starting to become a black hole, and shares the rock. Randle has more help, maybe he wont feel the need to dominate the ball.
I really hope Randle buys into an off ball role next season. We got a pg now. If he still insists on being a point forward this has the potential to get ugly
Philc1 wrote:GustavBahler wrote:Philc1 wrote:GustavBahler wrote:My concern with a Brunson/Mitchell backcourt is it working out like it did for Houston with CP3/Harden. Not being a good fit together, despite the talent. Sometimes it comes down to chemistry.The nets are another cautionary tale. “Oh they’ll be fine. KD won a championship with a shoot first pg Steph Curry.”
Not that Brunson is a shoot first pg. he’s not but Mitchell absolutely is and then you’ve got the perennial black hole Randle who we are stuck with minimum 2 more yearsRandle dribbling into a 1 on 5. Jacking up shots, was a black hole. But there is "multiverse Randle", as Rookie put it. That Randle knows when he is starting to become a black hole, and shares the rock. Randle has more help, maybe he wont feel the need to dominate the ball.
I really hope Randle buys into an off ball role next season. We got a pg now. If he still insists on being a point forward this has the potential to get ugly
That is up to the coach.
Philc1 wrote:GustavBahler wrote:Philc1 wrote:GustavBahler wrote:My concern with a Brunson/Mitchell backcourt is it working out like it did for Houston with CP3/Harden. Not being a good fit together, despite the talent. Sometimes it comes down to chemistry.The nets are another cautionary tale. “Oh they’ll be fine. KD won a championship with a shoot first pg Steph Curry.”
Not that Brunson is a shoot first pg. he’s not but Mitchell absolutely is and then you’ve got the perennial black hole Randle who we are stuck with minimum 2 more yearsRandle dribbling into a 1 on 5. Jacking up shots, was a black hole. But there is "multiverse Randle", as Rookie put it. That Randle knows when he is starting to become a black hole, and shares the rock. Randle has more help, maybe he wont feel the need to dominate the ball.
I really hope Randle buys into an off ball role next season. We got a pg now. If he still insists on being a point forward this has the potential to get ugly
Yes, we might even have two if DM is bought here! With the emergence of JR that dilutes the dependency of randle to not have to be the All NBA dude we leaned on. He as was not extended as that either. HE was not paid as a top 15 player. He is paid as a top 50.
And a said, its up to the coach to determine that. Not him.
Vmart wrote:Philc1 wrote:GustavBahler wrote:Philc1 wrote:GustavBahler wrote:My concern with a Brunson/Mitchell backcourt is it working out like it did for Houston with CP3/Harden. Not being a good fit together, despite the talent. Sometimes it comes down to chemistry.The nets are another cautionary tale. “Oh they’ll be fine. KD won a championship with a shoot first pg Steph Curry.”
Not that Brunson is a shoot first pg. he’s not but Mitchell absolutely is and then you’ve got the perennial black hole Randle who we are stuck with minimum 2 more yearsRandle dribbling into a 1 on 5. Jacking up shots, was a black hole. But there is "multiverse Randle", as Rookie put it. That Randle knows when he is starting to become a black hole, and shares the rock. Randle has more help, maybe he wont feel the need to dominate the ball.
I really hope Randle buys into an off ball role next season. We got a pg now. If he still insists on being a point forward this has the potential to get ugly
That is up to the coach.
If it’s up to Thibs then he will buy into the team concept
• Malik Beasley
• Patrick Beverley
• Leandro Bolmaro
• Walker Kessler (No. 22 pick in 2022 Draft)
• Jarred Vanderbilt
• 2023 first-round pick
• 2025 first-round pick
• 2026 pick swap
• 2027 first-round pick
• 2029 first-round pick
Vanderbilt and Beasley are good in a league average sort of way. Beverly is great on the right team; fringe playoff teams that need an identity. It's an open question whether or not Bollard or Kessler can be useful in the NBA. No one is talking about the massive haul the Jazz got in return based on these guys- instead it's all about the 5 picks.
But here's the thing about those picks- now with a projected starting 5 of Russell, Edwards, McDaniel, KAT and Gobert- how good will those picks be? Gobert is the perfect guy to elevate that team from play-in team to contender. I mean, holy shit! With all that scoring potential all the Wolves were missing is a low usage guy who can control the game on defense by keeping everyone out of the paint. They also get to move KAT out from under the basket to the perimeter where he can hit 3's all night long. While much has been made of 5-out lineups pushing Gobert out during the playoffs, that plan struggles when you have the likes of Edwards and KAT crashing the boards on both sides of the court.
A good comparison is the Holiday trade- Bledsoe, Hill and 3 first rounders for Jrue. The Pelicans basically rolled the dice on Giannis getting injured sometime for those picks to have any value. The issue for the Jazz is that Minnesota is a way, way deeper team. A big injury to any of their big 4 still leaves the Wolves with a playoff team. Utah is basically betting that Edwards and KAT both miss significant time in conjunction, even then I think Russell and Gobert could be pretty effective.
How does this pertain to the Knicks pursuit of D. Mitchell? Well, Gobert is a hell of a more impactful player than Mitchell is and the Knicks picks are also a hell of a lot more valuable. Even after the acquisition of D.Mitchell I'm not sure if the Knicks will be a playoff team. The East is a beast. While Minnesota looks like a top 4 team out west (with GSW, Phoenix, and a healthy Kawhi Clippers), are the Knicks with DM better than Boston, Milwaukee, Philly, Chicago, Atlanta, Miami, and Toronto? Projecting forward, Minnesota, due to the relative youth of their core, looks to be a pretty solid pick as a top team going forward with a decline in Curry, CP, and Kawhi much more plausible than the same happening to ANT man and KAT. That only hurts Utah's acquired draft picks. But for NY, with Cleveland, Charlotte, Detroit and Toronto being led by first and second year players, it doesn't look like a lock for the Knicks to be on top 3 or 4 years out.
All this is a long way for me to say that the value of those 5 future Minnesota picks is probably about the same as 1.5 unprotected picks from the Knicks. Knicks picks have a chance of converting in the top 4 in a way that Minnesota's just don't. The more I look at it Ainge, just took the best available deal for Gobert even if it meant getting a handful of nickels. The Knicks have to take the same approach with a DM trade. Danny's the one desperate to make a deal, not NY.
Final offer: Rose, Reddish, Toppin 2023 draft pick (unprotected), Dallas and Pistons picks
If Knicks succeed there picks are not as valuable. In a world were a trade goes good for the aquiring team the value should be higher. Utah should be compensated more. Less if the other way. The Eddy trade that Isiah did obviously is a prime example.
If The trade does not result well for minny perhsps the perception is they can trade either KAT or Edwards is they remain viable and replenish its base. Minny had to trade those players to get the salary in line. For us they would have to take Fornier plus more to get to 30mil.
Do I think Minny over paid? Lets see how the next three seasons pan out. As a fan its a really fun trade and one that unlocks there talent potential. With Brunson signed and our team configured I don’t see Mitchell as that kind of expanding thing. On the other hand DM would be our best player and a playmaker, and if he can make all around him better then perhaps im being shortsighted. With that lack of forsight I find it difficult to place value on what to pay Utah. Lets be real, if we win a chip with DM in the next three years its a bargain and the team obviously did just fine with other assets. But winning is hard and sometimes a team nails it but others do to and are better. As a fan its easier to suggest trading picks because we don’t know the players and we want to keep our beloved yoot.
If We do make a deal Deuce should go because he won’t get much opporunity to here. Does Utah value him? What about Rokas? Jazz could be in a great position to bring him in and offer him opportunity. Knicks with DM gets crowded for him. We use him or lose him.
So to me a fair deal is two knick picks, top 10 protected. EF, Grimes, Rokas, Deuce, the Dallas pick, the milwaukee pick. Thats my core. Utah will want more. Thus whats the fluff on top of that gets it done? What asset(s) can I live without that prevents knicks from making the deal? What is the competition as well? Can Wiz make a better package? Miami leads with Herro, then what? Is OKC ready to cash in some chips? Doubt they have any interest there. DM has a good contract to trade for. But they are on their own path perhaps. Rockets will eventually learn what most teams do that they need some leadership than just young kids running amuck.
Ainge can fold his table and go home and never trade him until his contract and stated preference become an issue.
gradyandrew wrote:I think everyone agrees that Mitchell would be a great addition, it just all depends on the price. The oft mentioned benchmark is what the Utah Jazz got for Gobert, to whit:
• Malik Beasley
• Patrick Beverley
• Leandro Bolmaro
• Walker Kessler (No. 22 pick in 2022 Draft)
• Jarred Vanderbilt
• 2023 first-round pick
• 2025 first-round pick
• 2026 pick swap
• 2027 first-round pick
• 2029 first-round pick
Good stuff. Here is another good way to outline it and perhaps how Minny looks at the trade of the picks (they would literally ask an actuary type who is NBA informed): https://basketball.realgm.com/nba/draft/...
Note: For this upcoming season 2022-23 Ant is 21yo, KAT is 27, Gobert is 30. At the 2026 draft Ant will be 24, KAT will be 30, Gobert will be 34.
Here is my uninformed actuary guesses:
• Walker Kessler (No. 22 pick in 2022 Draft) [top 20 pick in a weak draft]
• 2023 first-round pick [fully unprotected, 90+% chance this is a pick in the 20's]
• 2025 first-round pick [fully unprotected, 75+% chance this is a pick in the 20's]
• 2026 pick swap [50% chance there is no swap; >75% chance the swap is of little significance]
• 2027 first-round pick [scary, fully unprotected]
• 2029 first-round pick [scary, pick is 1-5 protected]
martin wrote:gradyandrew wrote:I think everyone agrees that Mitchell would be a great addition, it just all depends on the price. The oft mentioned benchmark is what the Utah Jazz got for Gobert, to whit:
• Malik Beasley
• Patrick Beverley
• Leandro Bolmaro
• Walker Kessler (No. 22 pick in 2022 Draft)
• Jarred Vanderbilt
• 2023 first-round pick
• 2025 first-round pick
• 2026 pick swap
• 2027 first-round pick
• 2029 first-round pickGood stuff. Here is another good way to outline it and perhaps how Minny looks at the trade of the picks (they would literally ask an actuary type who is NBA informed): https://basketball.realgm.com/nba/draft/...
Note: For this upcoming season 2022-23 Ant is 21yo, KAT is 27, Gobert is 30. At the 2026 draft Ant will be 24, KAT will be 30, Gobert will be 34.
Here is my uninformed actuary guesses:
• Walker Kessler (No. 22 pick in 2022 Draft) [top 20 pick in a weak draft]
• 2023 first-round pick [fully unprotected, 90+% chance this is a pick in the 20's]
• 2025 first-round pick [fully unprotected, 75+% chance this is a pick in the 20's]
• 2026 pick swap [50% chance there is no swap; >75% chance the swap is of little significance]
• 2027 first-round pick [scary, fully unprotected]
• 2029 first-round pick [scary, pick is 1-5 protected]
Thanks Martin. Also, good looks and summed up more clearly than I wrote. My basic thesis was that most of those picks are likely minor assets. You did great pointing out that the real value to Utah are the last two picks. My feeling is that even with DM, the Knicks aren't a lock as a top team so our immediate picks (if unprotected) are more valuable. The Murray trade is probably a better benchmark, but again Trae> anyone on the Knicks, so I would still say immediate Knicks picks are of higher value.