Philc1 wrote:

TheGame wrote:I guess my question is does trading Mitch guarantee I-Hart is staying. Are we not limited to paying him the early bird scale which maxes at $17.5 million per year, so whether we keep Mitch or not would not seem to impact I-Hart unless he tells them he will stay for $17.5 mill only if he is guaranteed the starting center spot.

I’d rather just keep Mitch. We have him under contract 2 more years his cap hit is $14.3 million next season and then it actually decreases the year after to $12.9 mil.

I want to keep Mitch too primarily because of his contract. I would offer I-Hart the max we can offer ($17.5 mil) and if he does not accept, then we just look for a cheaper option. There will be 2 or 3 decent centers we can get for around $12-$13 million a year.

Deni would be very nice versatile defensive piece with growing offensive game and someone who could spend time on likes of Tatum/Brown

KnickDanger wrote:I like IHart too but is he really worth 20 million a year or more? And is he irreplaceable? Doesn’t seem wise to go too far there. Whereas while acknowledging OG’s availability issue, he has shown he is indeed a game changer. Trusting the Rose regime.

I'm still in the "show me" mindset when it comes to these rumors. Remember when Austin Reeved was supposed to get this $20M per year contract? IHart is replaceable as long as Mitch is still here. As far as OG is concerned, doubt they bring him here without some understanding of what he needs to stay here. I think they're fine.

MaTT4281 wrote:

jaydh wrote:

NYKBocker wrote:I am not getting rid of Mitch. Our defense needs a rim protecting center

If we have to choose Mitch or iHart, i choose iHart.

But...we don't have to choose?

i think we do if OG is going to get near 40 mil. I don't think we want to be a 2nd apron team. unless we know for sure we have a championship team.

EwingsGlass wrote:

nycericanguy wrote:people thinking Mitch is gonna fetch #6 or Deni are going to be very disappointed. Mitch is likely more a salary dump for us with a small asset coming back.

That’s just like your opinion, man.

of course. aren't all these posts?

I think a realistic trade could be Mitch + WSH gets their 1st back from us for Krispert.

Not sure if we have room for Deni as much as I've always liked him, but I imagine a trade for him would have to include Mitch + both our 1sts this year, and even then I don't think WSH does that.

BigDaddyG wrote:

nycericanguy wrote:

EwingsGlass wrote:

nycericanguy wrote:people thinking Mitch is gonna fetch #6 or Deni are going to be very disappointed. Mitch is likely more a salary dump for us with a small asset coming back.

That’s just like your opinion, man.

of course. aren't all these posts?

I think a realistic trade could be Mitch + WSH gets their 1st back from us for Krispert.

Not sure if we have room for Deni as much as I've always liked him, but I imagine a trade for him would have to include Mitch + both our 1sts this year, and even then I don't think WSH does that.

I think Mitch for the six pick is unrealistic, but I doubt they have to attach a first round pick to Mitch in order to move him for Kispert. I agree with you on Deni. Washington has no need, or desire from what I've read, to trade Deni.

Krispert has more value than Mitch, shooters are highly valued, more than centers, and every team could use a young lethal shooter with great size. He also makes about half what Mitch makes and isn't injury prone.

So if the knicks are looking to move Mitch for cap purposes, and are getting a younger, cheaper, better player without any injury history, I imagine we'd have to attach SOMETHING. Now the fact that it's WSH we are talking to makes me think we are willing to move THAT 1st rounder since it's probably the least likeliest to convey and like ends up being two seconds.

So for us it's likely Mitch + two seconds for Krispert and salary relief. Seems fair.

Krispert also opens up the option of just declining BOG's contract and saving another $14m in salary.

And for WSH, It's probably more about having control over their own picks and less about the two seconds.

And I'm sure they value Mitch as someone who could bring some defensively identity to a team that badly needs it.

BigDaddyG wrote:

nycericanguy wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

nycericanguy wrote:

EwingsGlass wrote:

nycericanguy wrote:people thinking Mitch is gonna fetch #6 or Deni are going to be very disappointed. Mitch is likely more a salary dump for us with a small asset coming back.

That’s just like your opinion, man.

of course. aren't all these posts?

I think a realistic trade could be Mitch + WSH gets their 1st back from us for Krispert.

Not sure if we have room for Deni as much as I've always liked him, but I imagine a trade for him would have to include Mitch + both our 1sts this year, and even then I don't think WSH does that.

I think Mitch for the six pick is unrealistic, but I doubt they have to attach a first round pick to Mitch in order to move him for Kispert. I agree with you on Deni. Washington has no need, or desire from what I've read, to trade Deni.

Krispert has more value than Mitch, shooters are highly valued, more than centers, and every team could use a young lethal shooter with great size. He also makes about half what Mitch makes and isn't injury prone.

So if the knicks are looking to move Mitch for cap purposes, and are getting a younger, cheaper, better player without any injury history, I imagine we'd have to attach SOMETHING. Now the fact that it's WSH we are talking to makes me think we are willing to move THAT 1st rounder since it's probably the least likeliest to convey and like ends up being two seconds.

So for us it's likely Mitch + two seconds for Krispert and salary relief. Seems fair.

Krispert also opens up the option of just declining BOG's contract and saving another $14m in salary.

And for WSH, It's probably more about having control over their own picks and less about the two seconds.

And I'm sure they value Mitch as someone who could bring some defensively identity to a team that badly needs it.

Shooters are valuable, namely two-way shooters, which Kispert isn't. If Korey struggled to get minutes on the Wizards, why would I expect him to get major minutes here. He'd be a deep rotation guys. Mitch is easily the best player in this hypothetical deal. If any picks are attached, I'd expect more than Kispert. I don't see the Wizards being the only team interested in a Robinson deal, so there's no real pressure to deal with the Wizards.

Krispert played 80 games and 26mpg, he didn't struggle to get minutes. if he was a two way player he'd be a $25m player. but he also plays on a horrible defensive team, on a team like here he could be hidden more.

Shooters are a valuable commodity even if they aren't good defenders, Monk just signed for 4/80m and he's not the shooter CK is, nor does he have his size.

CK being underrated here, if we could get him in a deal for Mitch that could be huge for us.

BigDaddyG wrote:

nycericanguy wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

nycericanguy wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

nycericanguy wrote:

EwingsGlass wrote:

nycericanguy wrote:people thinking Mitch is gonna fetch #6 or Deni are going to be very disappointed. Mitch is likely more a salary dump for us with a small asset coming back.

That’s just like your opinion, man.

of course. aren't all these posts?

I think a realistic trade could be Mitch + WSH gets their 1st back from us for Krispert.

Not sure if we have room for Deni as much as I've always liked him, but I imagine a trade for him would have to include Mitch + both our 1sts this year, and even then I don't think WSH does that.

I think Mitch for the six pick is unrealistic, but I doubt they have to attach a first round pick to Mitch in order to move him for Kispert. I agree with you on Deni. Washington has no need, or desire from what I've read, to trade Deni.

Krispert has more value than Mitch, shooters are highly valued, more than centers, and every team could use a young lethal shooter with great size. He also makes about half what Mitch makes and isn't injury prone.

So if the knicks are looking to move Mitch for cap purposes, and are getting a younger, cheaper, better player without any injury history, I imagine we'd have to attach SOMETHING. Now the fact that it's WSH we are talking to makes me think we are willing to move THAT 1st rounder since it's probably the least likeliest to convey and like ends up being two seconds.

So for us it's likely Mitch + two seconds for Krispert and salary relief. Seems fair.

Krispert also opens up the option of just declining BOG's contract and saving another $14m in salary.

And for WSH, It's probably more about having control over their own picks and less about the two seconds.

And I'm sure they value Mitch as someone who could bring some defensively identity to a team that badly needs it.

Shooters are valuable, namely two-way shooters, which Kispert isn't. If Korey struggled to get minutes on the Wizards, why would I expect him to get major minutes here. He'd be a deep rotation guys. Mitch is easily the best player in this hypothetical deal. If any picks are attached, I'd expect more than Kispert. I don't see the Wizards being the only team interested in a Robinson deal, so there's no real pressure to deal with the Wizards.

Krispert played 80 games and 26mpg, he didn't struggle to get minutes. if he was a two way player he'd be a $25m player. but he also plays on a horrible defensive team, on a team like here he could be hidden more.

Shooters are a valuable commodity even if they aren't good defenders, Monk just signed for 4/80m and he's not the shooter CK is, nor does he have his size.

CK being underrated here, if we could get him in a deal for Mitch that could be huge for us.

I'd argue 25 mins a game on a Beal-less Wizards team is struggling. Monk can do a helluva lot more on offense than Kispert can. That's not an apples to apples comparison. I'm not saying Kispert doesn't belong in the NBA. But I think you're undervaluing Mitch's impact, especially at his salary

Mitch plays under 25mpg for his career, would you say he struggles to get min?

CK was at 29mpg the previous year, but he also plays the same position as Kuzma who has been their best player, and Deni who is their second best player and a guy they are heavily invested in as a #8 pick.

not unusual for a 23/24 year old to not play huge minutes, Monk didn't play as many minutes as CK until his 5th year in the league. CK is a 3 year player.

Mitch's salary is fine, but it's not some huge bargain for a Center that may only give you 50 games and 24mpg.

But I'd be very careful trading Mitch. I know he has his limitations and is injury prone but when he's available and at his best, he elevates this team to another level as we've seen in the playoffs. He's very good defensively, the best offensive rebounder in the league and one of he best defenders against Embiid. I don't think it's a coincidence we lost some playoff series' (Atlanta, Indiana) that Mitch couldn't play and ended up winning some playoff series where Mitch played a huge role (Cleveland, Philly). Plus his contract isn't bad.

I'm probably one of the few who values Mitch more than Hartenstein.

nycericanguy wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

nycericanguy wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

nycericanguy wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

nycericanguy wrote:

EwingsGlass wrote:

nycericanguy wrote:people thinking Mitch is gonna fetch #6 or Deni are going to be very disappointed. Mitch is likely more a salary dump for us with a small asset coming back.

That’s just like your opinion, man.

of course. aren't all these posts?

I think a realistic trade could be Mitch + WSH gets their 1st back from us for Krispert.

Not sure if we have room for Deni as much as I've always liked him, but I imagine a trade for him would have to include Mitch + both our 1sts this year, and even then I don't think WSH does that.

I think Mitch for the six pick is unrealistic, but I doubt they have to attach a first round pick to Mitch in order to move him for Kispert. I agree with you on Deni. Washington has no need, or desire from what I've read, to trade Deni.

Krispert has more value than Mitch, shooters are highly valued, more than centers, and every team could use a young lethal shooter with great size. He also makes about half what Mitch makes and isn't injury prone.

So if the knicks are looking to move Mitch for cap purposes, and are getting a younger, cheaper, better player without any injury history, I imagine we'd have to attach SOMETHING. Now the fact that it's WSH we are talking to makes me think we are willing to move THAT 1st rounder since it's probably the least likeliest to convey and like ends up being two seconds.

So for us it's likely Mitch + two seconds for Krispert and salary relief. Seems fair.

Krispert also opens up the option of just declining BOG's contract and saving another $14m in salary.

And for WSH, It's probably more about having control over their own picks and less about the two seconds.

And I'm sure they value Mitch as someone who could bring some defensively identity to a team that badly needs it.

Shooters are valuable, namely two-way shooters, which Kispert isn't. If Korey struggled to get minutes on the Wizards, why would I expect him to get major minutes here. He'd be a deep rotation guys. Mitch is easily the best player in this hypothetical deal. If any picks are attached, I'd expect more than Kispert. I don't see the Wizards being the only team interested in a Robinson deal, so there's no real pressure to deal with the Wizards.

Krispert played 80 games and 26mpg, he didn't struggle to get minutes. if he was a two way player he'd be a $25m player. but he also plays on a horrible defensive team, on a team like here he could be hidden more.

Shooters are a valuable commodity even if they aren't good defenders, Monk just signed for 4/80m and he's not the shooter CK is, nor does he have his size.

CK being underrated here, if we could get him in a deal for Mitch that could be huge for us.

I'd argue 25 mins a game on a Beal-less Wizards team is struggling. Monk can do a helluva lot more on offense than Kispert can. That's not an apples to apples comparison. I'm not saying Kispert doesn't belong in the NBA. But I think you're undervaluing Mitch's impact, especially at his salary

Mitch plays under 25mpg for his career, would you say he struggles to get min?

CK was at 29mpg the previous year, but he also plays the same position as Kuzma who has been their best player, and Deni who is their second best player and a guy they are heavily invested in as a #8 pick.

not unusual for a 23/24 year old to not play huge minutes, Monk didn't play as many minutes as CK until his 5th year in the league. CK is a 3 year player.

Mitch's salary is fine, but it's not some huge bargain for a Center that may only give you 50 games and 24mpg.

Mitch plays on a much better team. Again, not an apples to apples comparison. Kuz is 3/4 and kispert is 3/2/4. I don't blame Kuzma for blocking Kispert's minites.Do you think Jordan Poole would play here? Then why would I hold those same expectations for Kispert? Three point shooting is valuable if you bring other things to the table. There are hordes aof guys who bring three point shooting that aren't in the league. Max Strus is a worse three point shooter, but I guarantee you every team in the league would rather have Strus over Kispert.1 I'll go even further. Is Kispert even better than Sam Hauser? Mitch was a contender for defensive player of the year when he was healthy this season. The counting and analytic stats back up Mitch's impact. There's no way a team would trade Mitch for Kispert straight up. One guy is a starting level player and the other guy is a rotation player.