Celtics can offer Tatum, Brown who are more proven, #14 & #20 where they can target Fernando & Herro.
Lakers can offer #4(Bol Bol?), Ingram & Kuzma.

Vmart wrote:Trading Mitchell is inevitable.

What? Why?

Allanfan20 wrote:What about Barrett, Robinson and picks for Zion?

I'd like to dream. And this passes the would you do it test.

If I am NO, and resetting the franchise. Zion is great - but, what if they trade AD for #4 and some young assets, and then we offer them #3, Trier, Dotson, DSjr, Frank & the two picks from Dallas?

That accomplishes what Philly took years to do in one summer, and if I am NO, then I might well do that trade.

We have to shed some guys anyway for cap purposes. What is the point of having DSjr and Frank if Kyrie is here?

Zion, Durant and Kyrie should be enough to get us to the playoffs this year. And there is such a nice spread in their ages, that you will always have a star in their prime for the next 10+ years.

He has the best value contract in the NBA - in that sense, he's an even better trade commodity than the #1 overall pick - Zion over the next 3 seasons will earn in the neighborhood of $27m to Robinson's $5m.

Now compare that to AD's 2019-2020 salary of $27m by itself vs Robinson's ~$1.6m. That's $25+m of salary that could be distributed across a bunch of role players.

It's an interesting question for the Knicks. I mean, if all is true with Durant and Kyrie coming to the Knicks, is Robinson an ideal complementary player for them - he sucks in the defense to protect against lobs; he doesn't demand a lot of touches - a good thing with 2 ball dominant players. AD, for all his talents (he's a legit #1 scorer and strong distributor) needs the ball in his hands to maximize his value. Much like with guys like Kevin Love and Chris Bosh, when playing on championship level squads with 3 stars, someone has to defer. Wouldn't it be ironic to merely see AD playing a Mitchell Robinson-like role (or Al Horford-type role) rather that showing his full skill set?

From a straight up comparison standpoint, Robinson does appear to do a few things better than AD - run the floor, block shots on the perimeter, and finish (and that's even considering AD as elite at those same things as well). Mitch is a legit DPOTY candidate moving forward - a bit of a young Dwight Howard on D and emerging on offense.

On the flip side of the argument, acquiring Anthony Davis gives you elite talent to spare. If Durant or Kyrie miss some games, Davis would have the capacity to step. Robinson may have more to his game, but the Knicks haven't unleashed it - it'd be hard to count on him as a go-to player at this phase of his development.

In addition, Davis is only 26. He's still a pretty young player - just entering the prime of his career. He'll be able to keep going and be the face of the franchise when Durant moves to the next phase of his career.

TheGame wrote:Mitchell is untouchable. You don't trade the future defensive player of the year. As I said in another thread, Barrett, two first round picks, and Frank and Knox or Trier is all I would give up. We have some good young players who will grow into solid starters. The Knicks will be fine if we do nothing, so trading everything for AD would be a mistake.

Allanfan20 wrote:

fishmike wrote:

TheGame wrote:Mitchell is untouchable. You don't trade the future defensive player of the year. As I said in another thread, Barrett, two first round picks, and Frank and Knox or Trier is all I would give up. We have some good young players who will grow into solid starters. The Knicks will be fine if we do nothing, so trading everything for AD would be a mistake.

I actually agree and see him as our Ben Wallace. What he brings can not be taught

I don’t even want to go for AD to be honest. I get he’s a completely different player but I look back and see where giving up everything for Marbury, Curry and Melo took us and I just don’t see it as worth it. Even if he’s 100x better than those individual assets, it’s not worth it. Having a combo of Barrett and Mitch in their prime works. Letting them develop under Durant and Irving (God willing) has super nice benefits. How dare I say we can be contenders with that group and it would be fun to watch.

I think Mitch is almost certainly going to be Camby 2.0 and if he adds offensive polish, then what? I hate throwing out names like David Robinson after one year but that's the exact type of block impact he had as a rookie