HofstraBBall wrote:

fishmike wrote:

SergioNYK wrote:I'd put money on this trade NOT happening.

KNicks/Brock are tough to trade with... overly value conscience. Ainge is in the silly zone. Its not looking like it will happen which based on the cost/players involved I am fine with

Think the price Knicks would consider a win would be 4 firsts and one of the yougins. Plus a contract to unload.(Rose) So maybe Rose, Topping, 4 picks. Of course the Jazz want more and are in no rush. They probably want 5 picks, two youngins and a contract they can flip. So 5 picks, Tipping, Grimes, Rose.
Think at the end it will be something like 4 firsts, Obi, Cam, Rose with a third team incolved for Rose that gives Utah more draft capital.

Saw an article that made more sense if this happens. We would essentially be left we our perennial starters in RJ, Randle and Mitch while adding Brunson and DM. Our second unit would be IQ, Grimes, EF, Hart and Sims. Not too shabby. We can still try to trade EF for a SF but I think we need shooters. And he proved he is one.

fishmike wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

fishmike wrote:

SergioNYK wrote:I'd put money on this trade NOT happening.

KNicks/Brock are tough to trade with... overly value conscience. Ainge is in the silly zone. Its not looking like it will happen which based on the cost/players involved I am fine with

Think the price Knicks would consider a win would be 4 firsts and one of the yougins. Plus a contract to unload.(Rose) So maybe Rose, Topping, 4 picks. Of course the Jazz want more and are in no rush. They probably want 5 picks, two youngins and a contract they can flip. So 5 picks, Tipping, Grimes, Rose.
Think at the end it will be something like 4 firsts, Obi, Cam, Rose with a third team incolved for Rose that gives Utah more draft capital.

Saw an article that made more sense if this happens. We would essentially be left we our perennial starters in RJ, Randle and Mitch while adding Brunson and DM. Our second unit would be IQ, Grimes, EF, Hart and Sims. Not too shabby. We can still try to trade EF for a SF but I think we need shooters. And he proved he is one.

they just got 6 picks for Gobert... I have heard 6-8 FRPs and 3 young players. Obi and a bunch of picks with protection is not a good trade for them. They should walk away with min 2 starters and 6 FRPs... which is why we make sense. We can give 3 of the aquired + 3 of our own and 2-3 starters in IQ/Obi/Grimes. Utah is not taking less.. Ainge would be a fool to

They only want Knicks Draft picks and swaps.... Like legit the knicks dont have control of their own draft picks until 2029.

shinmen wrote:

fishmike wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

fishmike wrote:

SergioNYK wrote:I'd put money on this trade NOT happening.

KNicks/Brock are tough to trade with... overly value conscience. Ainge is in the silly zone. Its not looking like it will happen which based on the cost/players involved I am fine with

Think the price Knicks would consider a win would be 4 firsts and one of the yougins. Plus a contract to unload.(Rose) So maybe Rose, Topping, 4 picks. Of course the Jazz want more and are in no rush. They probably want 5 picks, two youngins and a contract they can flip. So 5 picks, Tipping, Grimes, Rose.
Think at the end it will be something like 4 firsts, Obi, Cam, Rose with a third team incolved for Rose that gives Utah more draft capital.

Saw an article that made more sense if this happens. We would essentially be left we our perennial starters in RJ, Randle and Mitch while adding Brunson and DM. Our second unit would be IQ, Grimes, EF, Hart and Sims. Not too shabby. We can still try to trade EF for a SF but I think we need shooters. And he proved he is one.

they just got 6 picks for Gobert... I have heard 6-8 FRPs and 3 young players. Obi and a bunch of picks with protection is not a good trade for them. They should walk away with min 2 starters and 6 FRPs... which is why we make sense. We can give 3 of the aquired + 3 of our own and 2-3 starters in IQ/Obi/Grimes. Utah is not taking less.. Ainge would be a fool to

If that is the price for Mitchell, what would be the market for a guy like Giannis? 15 FRP, 2 all stars and 5 young players. The price asked by Ainge is ridiculous. The Gobert trade has completely messed up the trade market. He should ask for that much. That's his job to maximize Mitchell trade value but he should not receive any offers close to that. The only team that would that is one that is 95% sure it wins the next title with this trade. No chance it happens with Ainge first proposal.

fishmike wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

fishmike wrote:

SergioNYK wrote:I'd put money on this trade NOT happening.

KNicks/Brock are tough to trade with... overly value conscience. Ainge is in the silly zone. Its not looking like it will happen which based on the cost/players involved I am fine with

Think the price Knicks would consider a win would be 4 firsts and one of the yougins. Plus a contract to unload.(Rose) So maybe Rose, Topping, 4 picks. Of course the Jazz want more and are in no rush. They probably want 5 picks, two youngins and a contract they can flip. So 5 picks, Tipping, Grimes, Rose.
Think at the end it will be something like 4 firsts, Obi, Cam, Rose with a third team incolved for Rose that gives Utah more draft capital.

Saw an article that made more sense if this happens. We would essentially be left we our perennial starters in RJ, Randle and Mitch while adding Brunson and DM. Our second unit would be IQ, Grimes, EF, Hart and Sims. Not too shabby. We can still try to trade EF for a SF but I think we need shooters. And he proved he is one.

they just got 6 picks for Gobert... I have heard 6-8 FRPs and 3 young players. Obi and a bunch of picks with protection is not a good trade for them. They should walk away with min 2 starters and 6 FRPs... which is why we make sense. We can give 3 of the aquired + 3 of our own and 2-3 starters in IQ/Obi/Grimes. Utah is not taking less.. Ainge would be a fool to

As mentioned, that is probably what the Jazz want. Maybe more. Don't see why Knicks would have to do that though. They are one of few teams that can directly offer that type of package. It also does not factor in flipping someone like Rose, EF or Cam to get the Jazz some of what they want. Also feel that Jazz are not in as strong position as the media claims. No They do not want to go into the season with DM. Not something DM or the Jazz want. Ainge wants a true rebuilding year. Which includes qualifying for a top pick. DM will not want one of his young years wasted. There are other teams interested but most with complications that would involve several teams to be included.

Of course my wish is that we try to keep Grimes and IQ. They are the most skilled youngins. But as you said, probably why the Jazz want them. Wishing they keep the offer to something I mentioned up thread. Will even be okay adding one or two more picks and adding guys like Deuce, Roka, Keels. Which be a huge win for us. Unlikely, but possible. And we can all dream right.

A 1-3
B 4-10
C 11-20
D 21-30

Actual value varies by draft and every once in a while 1 is a generational talent by itself.

Gobert trade was arguably 4 D picks based solely on current expectation. The fact that only the 4th pick has Top 5 protection is the part that makes it weird. If they actually took the last 4 players they drafted 20-30, I don’t think anyone would blink an eye. But it DRuss starts videotaping Gobert talking about his side hustle, those 4 picks lack the protections to make them reasonable. Throw in Walker Kessler as the centerpiece of the trade and you have a lot of little pieces for a DPOY anchor. 8 years from now we will know if this panned out for Ainge, but more picks is better when you are looking for the guy.

Mitchell to the Knicks is different.I’d expect Mitchell to move us up from being a B/C pick to a C/D pick. Most likely C. I’m alright trading 5 C picks for Mitchell and the same reason Ainge isn’t willing to accept 5 C picks. Mitchell is the kind of player that should trade for a solid B pick and a rotation player. Depending on the draft, you probably wouldn’t trade 3 C picks for a B. OKC traded 3 deferred C/Ds for a borderline B/C. The heavy protections make it impossible for those to be better than C/D.

But I started that those A/B/C/D categories are by draft. 2023 on paper looks like

1AA
2-5 A
6-10 B+
11-15 B
16-20 B-
21-30 C
31-60 D

I might be loose in these categories, but the logic is that a 2nd rd pick in 2023 has pro forma value of a 20-30 pick in any other draft. The 21-30 picks in 2023 at Rookie scale should have tremendous value. I’d expect at least 1 and up to 3 of our conditional picks to vest.

If it were me, I’m checking back in at the trade deadline to see where our fortunes lie. We can’t give unconditional picks without knowing Mitchell just solves a problem the way Gobert does for Minnesota. And I probably wouldn’t give up 3 B picks for Mitchell in an ordinary draft.

We will not know those conditional picks values until the end of the season though, so, they could be B-type picks or they could be 2024 picks (too soon to tell).

Happy to revisit a Mitchell trade in a year when he is 26 and our 2023 lotto ticket value has been determined.

EwingsGlass wrote:We are too caught up in the number of picks and not considering the value of those picks.

A 1-3
B 4-10
C 11-20
D 21-30

Actual value varies by draft and every once in a while 1 is a generational talent by itself.

Gobert trade was arguably 4 D picks based solely on current expectation. The fact that only the 4th pick has Top 5 protection is the part that makes it weird. If they actually took the last 4 players they drafted 20-30, I don’t think anyone would blink an eye. But it DRuss starts videotaping Gobert talking about his side hustle, those 4 picks lack the protections to make them reasonable. Throw in Walker Kessler as the centerpiece of the trade and you have a lot of little pieces for a DPOY anchor. 8 years from now we will know if this panned out for Ainge, but more picks is better when you are looking for the guy.

Mitchell to the Knicks is different.I’d expect Mitchell to move us up from being a B/C pick to a C/D pick. Most likely C. I’m alright trading 5 C picks for Mitchell and the same reason Ainge isn’t willing to accept 5 C picks. Mitchell is the kind of player that should trade for a solid B pick and a rotation player. Depending on the draft, you probably wouldn’t trade 3 C picks for a B. OKC traded 3 deferred C/Ds for a borderline B/C. The heavy protections make it impossible for those to be better than C/D.

But I started that those A/B/C/D categories are by draft. 2023 on paper looks like

1AA
2-5 A
6-10 B+
11-15 B
16-20 B-
21-30 C
31-60 D

I might be loose in these categories, but the logic is that a 2nd rd pick in 2023 has pro forma value of a 20-30 pick in any other draft. The 21-30 picks in 2023 at Rookie scale should have tremendous value. I’d expect at least 1 and up to 3 of our conditional picks to vest.

If it were me, I’m checking back in at the trade deadline to see where our fortunes lie. We can’t give unconditional picks without knowing Mitchell just solves a problem the way Gobert does for Minnesota. And I probably wouldn’t give up 3 B picks for Mitchell in an ordinary draft.

We will not know those conditional picks values until the end of the season though, so, they could be B-type picks or they could be 2024 picks (too soon to tell).

Happy to revisit a Mitchell trade in a year when he is 26 and our 2023 lotto ticket value has been determined.

Great post!!!! Thank you for sharing. Bottom line is you get DM this **** better work or we screwed up. Given our history its easy to wince at it.
My take is if we don’t do this deal and Miami does Herro and 3 no. 1’s fans will think “We could have beat that”. Seems we all hung up on what fans/media think.

Leon and Co got this and I trust if they don’t want to do it. Miami for all their greatness do short windows, usually fall back, then comeback with another. Fact is Miami got Jimmy Butler 4 more years under contract taking him to age 37. He makes 37mil this year and THEN his extension: 3 years 150mil kicks in!
I love Jimmy, but by the end of the season he was cooked. Herro is a nice piece but not sure they see him as a cornerstone. Bam is over paid still and inconsistant offensively. He still has upside thought. DM makes a good fit.
Miami like a lot of teams. Pushing on the ceiling of what they can do.
And they have two more years of Kyle Lowrey at 28 and 29mil each.
Miami fans have success for them to lay back on. We pulled that move fans would storm the castle. Kyle 3 years @85mil made kemba look good.

Duncan Robinson did not stand up to his deal and Jimmy looked a bit tired. Be interesting to see what they come back with. Riley good like that!

shinmen wrote:

EwingsGlass wrote:We are too caught up in the number of picks and not considering the value of those picks.

A 1-3
B 4-10
C 11-20
D 21-30

Actual value varies by draft and every once in a while 1 is a generational talent by itself.

Gobert trade was arguably 4 D picks based solely on current expectation. The fact that only the 4th pick has Top 5 protection is the part that makes it weird. If they actually took the last 4 players they drafted 20-30, I don’t think anyone would blink an eye. But it DRuss starts videotaping Gobert talking about his side hustle, those 4 picks lack the protections to make them reasonable. Throw in Walker Kessler as the centerpiece of the trade and you have a lot of little pieces for a DPOY anchor. 8 years from now we will know if this panned out for Ainge, but more picks is better when you are looking for the guy.

Mitchell to the Knicks is different.I’d expect Mitchell to move us up from being a B/C pick to a C/D pick. Most likely C. I’m alright trading 5 C picks for Mitchell and the same reason Ainge isn’t willing to accept 5 C picks. Mitchell is the kind of player that should trade for a solid B pick and a rotation player. Depending on the draft, you probably wouldn’t trade 3 C picks for a B. OKC traded 3 deferred C/Ds for a borderline B/C. The heavy protections make it impossible for those to be better than C/D.

But I started that those A/B/C/D categories are by draft. 2023 on paper looks like

1AA
2-5 A
6-10 B+
11-15 B
16-20 B-
21-30 C
31-60 D

I might be loose in these categories, but the logic is that a 2nd rd pick in 2023 has pro forma value of a 20-30 pick in any other draft. The 21-30 picks in 2023 at Rookie scale should have tremendous value. I’d expect at least 1 and up to 3 of our conditional picks to vest.

If it were me, I’m checking back in at the trade deadline to see where our fortunes lie. We can’t give unconditional picks without knowing Mitchell just solves a problem the way Gobert does for Minnesota. And I probably wouldn’t give up 3 B picks for Mitchell in an ordinary draft.

We will not know those conditional picks values until the end of the season though, so, they could be B-type picks or they could be 2024 picks (too soon to tell).

Happy to revisit a Mitchell trade in a year when he is 26 and our 2023 lotto ticket value has been determined.

Good post indeed. That's why I would be horrified if we gave unprotected picks. I would at least need a top 3 protection ad vitaem. With our luck, Mitchell could tear an ACL, we then end up in the lottery and this would be the year our pick jumps to 1st.
We should not go all in when we were not even a play in team last year.
For a win/win scenario with the Jazz go for it. If it fails, you're not completely stuck for 5 years. The Nets had a year ago Harden, Durant and Irving. Look at them now.

SupremeCommander wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:Any minute now......

this thread clearly jinxed the Knicks

BING BONG!

SupremeCommander wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:Any minute now......

this thread clearly jinxed the Knicks

If it took a few more months of Knick frustration for the Mets to get on the stretch they're on now, then I'm cool with. I'm numb to Knicks disappointment. If they can eat the Mets ineptitude the go ahead. They can hold off acquiring Spida till he's 35.

The more the FO offers for DM (as good as he is) the less I'm sold. Adding Brunson is going to change how this squad goes at other squads. We will be good at some things, and not so good, to bad at others. Would like to see how Brunson changes chemistry first before another big deal.

Its been argued that Clyde and Earl faced the same questions when they became the starting backcourt. Thats true, but its also true that
Clyde was already on the team, running the offense. Unless Ainge's asking price turns out to be more reasonable than expected, Id like to see Brunson get that same opportunity.

MaTT4281 wrote:

SupremeCommander wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:Any minute now......

this thread clearly jinxed the Knicks

BING BONG!