OT Donavan Mitchell trade watch

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Chris Craig said:
Knicks along with filler.

Barrett,Quickly, Fournier, Reddish,Toppin and four first including the Milwaukee 2025 1st.
Click to expand...
If this doesn’t convince you they should trade Lillard I don’t know what will. Can completely revamp the organization
 
calvin natt said:
If this doesn’t convince you they should trade Lillard I don’t know what will. Can completely revamp the organization
Click to expand...
Bunch of OK players, other than Barrett, and latter half of 1st round picks. Doesn't guaranty they will be competitive for years. Barrett is the best player there, and Knicks have said they're not including him. You don't trade generational players. The Knicks will be on there way with Mitchell. Others will definitely follow.
 
calvin natt said:
If this doesn’t convince you they should trade Lillard I don’t know what will. Can completely revamp the organization
Click to expand...

Lillard > Mitchell > Gobert

I don’t like the ridiculous number of 1st rounders AND players (real ones) AND pick swaps.
Minnesota wanted to win (really really badly and haven’t) and paid. Okay, I get it. Desperate Outlier.
What Dame should get compared to that? What Durant should get? What Brooklyn is asking for?

Ainge just needs one motivated buyer (the Knicks) to max out. Then sell off Bogdanovic and Conley for what he can get in picks and young guys … along with the threat of a plausible alternative (the Heat) to deny the Knicks a shot beyond mediocrity.

If Dame was to be traded after this upcoming season, Nurkic has to go, first. Maximize the outgoing assets for who will fit with Simons and Sharpe moving forward. Nurkic traded before the February deadline while he’s still healthy? [A package with Myles Turner. Ayton. Bamba.]. I could easily get on board.
 
calvin natt said:
If this doesn’t convince you they should trade Lillard I don’t know what will. Can completely revamp the organization
Click to expand...

Because before the deadline the only right answer is to not trade dame.

Any other answer is wrong based on common sense.
 
HoopsFanAZ said:
Lillard > Mitchell > Gobert

I don’t like the ridiculous number of 1st rounders AND players (real ones) AND pick swaps.
Minnesota wanted to win (really really badly and haven’t) and paid. Okay, I get it. Desperate Outlier.
What Dame should get compared to that? What Durant should get? What Brooklyn is asking for?

Ainge just needs one motivated buyer (the Knicks) to max out. Then sell off Bogdanovic and Conley for what he can get in picks and young guys … along with the threat of a plausible alternative (the Heat) to deny the Knicks a shot beyond mediocrity.

If Dame was to be traded after this upcoming season, Nurkic has to go, first. Maximize the outgoing assets for who will fit with Simons and Sharpe moving forward. Nurkic traded before the February deadline while he’s still healthy? [A package with Myles Turner. Ayton. Bamba.]. I could easily get on board.
Click to expand...

I wonder where Durant fits in? I'd think trade value should be ranked as;

Lillard > Mitchell > Durant > Gobert?

I'd say Durant is better for the single 2022-23 season than Mitchell (likely better than Dame too) but he is older, more expensive, more injury prone, and forcing his way to now a 4th team.

Might be an argument for Mitchell to be above Dame based on age. I'm shocked Gobert was traded for so much, at his salary I'm not sure he is even worth his contract, plus 4 picks? Has been played off the floor in the playoffs in multiple season, centers just don't seem valuable in today's NBA. It will be interesting to see if Towns&Gobert provides a new blueprint for teams to win or is an epic fail. Timberwolves history would have me lean towards expecting the latter.
 
Strenuus said:
Because before the deadline the only right answer is to not trade dame.

Any other answer is wrong based on common sense.
Click to expand...

Did you think the same about LaMarcus? That team was better than any Dame team has been since, including the Kanter WCF team.

What about Sheed, or Drexler?

I'm not saying the Blazers have to trade Dame, it might ultimate be best to keep him. But there are plenty of valid scenarios where the team would be much better by trading Dame in the next year and rebuilding. Just because you have a different preference doesn't make your opinion "common sense" and all other viewpoints "wrong".
 
WesleyMatthews said:
Did you think the same about LaMarcus? That team was better than any Dame team has been since, including the Kanter WCF team.

What about Sheed, or Drexler?

I'm not saying the Blazers have to trade Dame, it might ultimate be best to keep him. But there are plenty of valid scenarios where the team would be much better by trading Dame in the next year and rebuilding. Just because you have a different preference doesn't make your opinion "common sense" and all other viewpoints "wrong".
Click to expand...
The arguments behind trading Dame now and trading LA in 2014 is comparing apples to airplanes. I'm not sure the scenarios could be more different.
 
WesleyMatthews said:
Did you think the same about LaMarcus? That team was better than any Dame team has been since, including the Kanter WCF team.

What about Sheed, or Drexler?

I'm not saying the Blazers have to trade Dame, it might ultimate be best to keep him. But there are plenty of valid scenarios where the team would be much better by trading Dame in the next year and rebuilding. Just because you have a different preference doesn't make your opinion "common sense" and all other viewpoints "wrong".
Click to expand...
If Ant continues on his trajectory, and Sharpe is that good, this team will be winning the title in the near future because Dame is special. We all want that. I know what Dame can do, but i have no idea if Ant can up his game come playoff time, and Sharpe is a total mystery right now. But screw a rebuild. Because if the Blazers have to completely rebuild, it means Ant and Sharpe flamed out.
 
tykendo said:
If Ant continues on his trajectory, and Sharpe is that good, this team will be winning the title in the near future because Dame is special. We all want that. I know what Dame can do, but i have no idea if Ant can up his game come playoff time, and Sharpe is a total mystery right now. But screw a rebuild. Because if the Blazers have to completely rebuild, it means Ant and Sharpe flamed out.
Click to expand...

Yes, I'd much prefer Sharpe and or Ant look like stars and this team has a path to eventually contend, then sure the team can try to win.

Who knows what will happen in the season though; if Ant looks horrible by the trade deadline, and Sharpe projects as a bust, maybe Nurk has taken a step back, and the team is way out of playoff relevance I can see trading Dame being a good option to rebuild if not the clearly the best option.

It's certainly not a 100% lock that the team must keep Dame and all other options are 100% "wrong" as some posters state. We will have to see how the season goes.
 
WesleyMatthews said:
Yes, I'd much prefer Sharpe and or Ant look like stars and this team has a path to eventually contend, then sure the team can try to win.

Who knows what will happen in the season though; if Ant looks horrible by the trade deadline, and Sharpe projects as a bust, maybe Nurk has taken a step back, and the team is way out of playoff relevance I can see trading Dame being a good option to rebuild if not the clearly the best option.

It's certainly not a 100% lock that the team must keep Dame and all other options are 100% "wrong" as some posters state. We will have to see how the season goes.
Click to expand...
Zach Lowe suggested trading Ant & Sharpe plus picks for Mitchell. Obviously that couldn't be done till midseason. But if Ainge is an Ant fan, and loves the upside, potential superstardom of Sharpe, you never know. I love that a Nat'l reporter thinks outside the proverbial box of Lakers/Knicks/Celtics on his podcast. Those 2 players salary and a filler min. contract should work. Would any of you fellow Blazers nuts be up for that?
 
tykendo said:
Zach Lowe suggested trading Ant & Sharpe plus picks for Mitchell. Obviously that couldn't be done till midseason. But if Ainge is an Ant fan, and loves the upside, potential superstardom of Sharpe, you never know. I love that a Nat'l reporter thinks outside the proverbial box of Lakers/Knicks/Celtics on his podcast. Those 2 players salary and a filler min. contract should work. Would any of you fellow Blazers nuts be up for that?
Click to expand...

I would be furious if we did that.
 
Mitchell would be a great 2 guard. He's not a PG ,IMO. And he's just behind Dame as a closer. He plays big for his size. He plays more like a 6-5 player IMO.
 
tykendo said:
Mitchell would be a great 2 guard. He's not a PG ,IMO. And he's just behind Dame as a closer. He plays big for his size. He plays more like a 6-5 player IMO.
Click to expand...
Your hinting that the Blazers should be flirting with the idea of trading for Mitchell?
 
tykendo said:
Not saying it's a bad take, but can you please explain your reason, or reasons?
Click to expand...

First reason is that I don't think we should move Ant/Sharpe unless we're getting a legitimate superstar player. Durant is really the only example of that.

Second, Mitchell is not really much of an upgrade from CJ. He doesn't change our trajectory at all. On the Jazz, he is basically CJ with a higher usage.

CJ on NOP - 24.3 ppg, 49% from the field, 39.4% from three, 5.8 assists, 4.5 rebounds, and 1.3 steals
Mitchell - 25.9 ppg, 44.8% from the field, 35.5% from three, 5.3 assists, 4.2 rebounds, and 1.5 steals

Ok that's just the basic data. Here is the advanced stuff:

CJ on NOP -
21.9 PER
.580 TS%
31.3 AST%
29.4 USG%

Mitchell
21.6 PER
.572 TS%
27.7 AST%
32.9 USG%

They're strikingly similar players when they have a similar USG rate. Neither one of them is a very good defender. CJ is a better shooter. They're both undersized, but Mitchell is VERY undersized.

Hard pass from me.
 
The Blazers don't need to trade for Mitchell.

The Blazers need Mitchell traded East.

Looks like the Jazz will also be trading Conley.

The trade with the Knicks is no longer a done deal.

The Wizards want to trade for Mitchell to pair him with Beal.

The Raptors are willing to move some of those forwards for him and are said to be talking trades with Utah.

The Kings want Mitchell in desperation to make the playoffs.

Several other teams including Miami who is getting no where with a trade for Durant, Atlanta, and Charlotte are among others interested.

Minnesota going all in for Gobert and giving so much up for him has caused Utah to get greedy. Probably should just have went with NYKs deal. Likely won't get a better offer. Who knows though. It's getting crazy out there.
 
Natebishop3 said:
First reason is that I don't think we should move Ant/Sharpe unless we're getting a legitimate superstar player. Durant is really the only example of that.

Second, Mitchell is not really much of an upgrade from CJ. He doesn't change our trajectory at all. On the Jazz, he is basically CJ with a higher usage.

CJ on NOP - 24.3 ppg, 49% from the field, 39.4% from three, 5.8 assists, 4.5 rebounds, and 1.3 steals
Mitchell - 25.9 ppg, 44.8% from the field, 35.5% from three, 5.3 assists, 4.2 rebounds, and 1.5 steals

Ok that's just the basic data. Here is the advanced stuff:

CJ on NOP -
21.9 PER
.580 TS%
31.3 AST%
29.4 USG%

Mitchell
21.6 PER
.572 TS%
27.7 AST%
32.9 USG%

They're strikingly similar players when they have a similar USG rate. Neither one of them is a very good defender. CJ is a better shooter. They're both undersized, but Mitchell is VERY undersized.

Hard pass from me.
Click to expand...
I think Mitchell is a better finisher in the clutch. I loved CJ ,but understood the need for a change going forward. I'm happy for his success. I do think Mitchell is next level good though. Not Dame, but in the area. IMO. Teaming him with Dame is intriguing to me, but i get your take. Nothings guaranteed. But i'm not completely sold on Ant. And Sharpe has the incredible skillset, but can he do it . We all hope he turns into a superstar. I think Ant is a fantastic talent. Not sure about future superstar to Dame's level. That's why i'd look at the Mitchell thing. But ideally , both Ant & Sharpe would reach epic levels, and along with Dame, win it all. I'm willing to be patient. I think Dame , because of his work ethic, and talent, will age better than others. I see the wait to see it all pan out as worth it. Some in here are like, if it ain't going perfect by mid season, blow it up and rebuild. F That! I see it taking a 2 to 3 years to get there. I think it can be special. And will.
 
tykendo said:
Not saying it's a bad take, but can you please explain your reason, or reasons?
Click to expand...

Two big reasons I would have nearly zero interest in the Blazers going after Mitchell;

First if your going to pair a star with Dame it shouldn't be a second short poor defensive guard. There is less gain from their positives as they duplicate strengths, and more costs to their negatives as the team needs to mask two sets of their liabilities.

Second, the Blazers shouldn't be trading youth for vets unless they can contend. The Blazers don't have the talent to contend after this trade, so it doesn't make sense to trade a younger player with upside in Ant, or a near high school young prospect in Sharpe who is on a beneficial cheap rookie scale contract for 4 more years. Even when those two are due raises, it'll be much less than a Mitchell supermax.

Similar reason as going after Beal or LaVine made no sense for the Blazers.
 
WesleyMatthews said:
Two big reasons I would have nearly zero interest in the Blazers going after Mitchell;

First if your going to pair a star with Dame it shouldn't be a second short poor defensive guard. There is less gain from their positives as they duplicate strengths, and more costs to their negatives as the team needs to mask two sets of their liabilities.

Second, the Blazers shouldn't be trading youth for vets unless they can contend. The Blazers don't have the talent to contend after this trade, so it doesn't make sense to trade a younger player with upside in Ant, or a near high school young prospect in Sharpe who is on a beneficial cheap rookie scale contract for 4 more years. Even when those two are due raises, it'll be much less than a Mitchell supermax.

Similar reason as going after Beal or LaVine made no sense for the Blazers.
Click to expand...
Great take, and i understand. I'm all for being patient. But not a total rebuild. OKC broke it down, and while they had a decent team with Paul, not close to contending. They're still years away, IMO. And even with the new guys, i'm not seeing generational talent on that OKC team yet. And they may never get another talent as good as Durant. Especially as their picks get later in the draft due to being at least competitive.
 
Mitchell >>> CJ
CJ (6’2.25, 197, 6’6.25 wingspan) plays small and avoids contact to get his shot. No D in his name.
Mitchell (6’1.25, 215, 6’10 wingspan) is not known for his D, but he’s aggressive and plays larger.

Do I “think” Ant will be > than CJ? Yes. CJ is skilled. Ant has an X factor — IMHO.
Mitchell for Ant + Sharpe + ? for a win now team?

We should know by the February deadline (even by January 15) enough about Ant and a good guess on Sharpe. It could be a reasonable move by both teams. Right now, the Blazers can’t do it and Utah shouldn’t.
 
I am not a big Mitchell fan. Not saying he is not good, because he is, but I don't think he makes his teammates better. His best games have been when he dominates the ball, much like James Harden. The problem is he is not as good as Harden. Not sure what type of players are best to surround him with, but I certainly don't think it is Dame.
 
Pinwheel1 said:
I am not a big Mitchell fan. Not saying he is not good, because he is, but I don't think he makes his teammates better. His best games have been when he dominates the ball, much like James Harden. The problem is he is not as good as Harden. Not sure what type of players are best to surround him with, but I certainly don't think it is Dame.
Click to expand...

I wouldn’t worry too much. I don’t even think the Blazers front office has the balls too try for such a move. A big part of the problem is they haven’t even had the balls since the trader Bob days.
 
Natebishop3 said:
The numbers just don't back that up. They're not that different offensively in terms of production.
Click to expand...

CJ now has to be the leader on his team, and it will be interesting if he becomes that every game -- including how it affects his production. As the 3rd option on O, he should be a good one. On D, he's going to get lit up.

Mitchell would be the starting SG and has been the driving force on Utah as a 1A from SG. The fit with Lillard would have to be worked out and their collective D would have to improve. It wouldn't be worse than with CJ. Would not.

Mitchell and CJ's stats/production aren't FAR apart -- as you say. Mitchell has gotten his from the jump. CJ grew into his pretty quickly and has been Dame's wing man, since ... a clear number 2 and gets the 2nd best defender of guards from the other team. I hope he does well with NO's forwards -- they could fit really well on O unless CJ continues to pound the air out of the ball.

Would I rather have Dame and CJ vs. Dame and Mitchell? Easy call. Okay, way too easy. Mitchell. They'd go AFTER the other team on O. The apparent valuation of the League on CJ and Mitchell's worth in trade, aside.
Dame, Ant, and Sharpe vs. Dame and Mitchell? I don't know. I'll know (a little) more by January 15. I hope for Utah's sake Mitchell is gone before the season starts, and they get their boatload.
 
calvin natt said:
If that’s the going rate. And we saw already what Gobert got them. Unless you think Lillard would fetch less than those two which is possible.
Click to expand...

you didn't have any "if" in your post and were using speculation of the Mitchell trade to argue in favor of trading Lillard

as far as the Gobert trade, to start with, what one team pays for a player, who is a completely different player than Dame, is no indication at all at the market for Dame. Minny has been pretty universally gauged as having made a really stupid trade. As far as the return Utah got, the players aren't much, and the best player they got back is a convicted felon. What has made some ga-ga about the return is the draft pick capital, and there's plenty of reason to believe the picks won't amount to much, at least not over the next 4 seasons. Hard to "revamp" a team when the best assets returned might be draft picks 5 & 7 years from now

like it or not, and apparently, a bunch of people don't like it, Dame's extension pretty much kills his trade value for the next couple of seasons
 
Minnesota had had so many lottery picks over the years and they really haven't paid off to date.
The picks they give to Utah are a ways off, and wont probably pan out?
 
Hoopguru said:
Minnesota had had so many lottery picks over the years and they really haven't paid off to date.
The picks they give to Utah are a ways off, and wont probably pan out?
Click to expand...

First off it won't be Minnesota's stupid GM's making the picks.

Second, people thought the Boston picks acquired in the KG/Pierce trade were worth even less. Boston ended up with Brown and Tatum.

Sure the picks might not amount to much, but who knows, they might amount to an MVP. Getting a number of extra chance at a star is a great way if not the best way to rebuild a team.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top