Donovan Mitchell is averaging career-highs in points, FG%, made three-pointers, 3PT%, blocks and FT percentage. The Cavs have the third best record in the NBA. Meanwhile, in New York...
It’s an epic failure by the Knicks again! They’ve been in a perpetual rebuild for the last 20 years and now had their chance to get a young elite player that could make them a very good team and with some tweaking of the roster over the next couple of years using more of their assets could have made them a championship contender. No team in the NBA is winning a championship without at least one elite player, the Knick now don’t even have an all star on their roster. So unfortunately it looks like we’re heading towards another 20 year rebuild again because this GM is not capable of making good decisions to improve this team. The Knicks also have the worst talent evaluators in the league that over the years passed up on multiple future all stars in the draft, including Mitchell!
I normally like what you write. But, this is a snarky article. It would have been a lot more interesting if you actually wrote an article about how it is way too early to make a determination which could have incorporated all the plus points you mentioned + something like the following
Everyone knows that Mitchell is an all-star and a great offensive player. The Jazz were the #1 seed in the West a couple of years ago with Mitchell / Gobert. I don't recall their exact record, but the Cavs were a very good team in the first part of the regular season last year before injuries started piling up. So, is it unexpected / particularly impressive that Mitchell is putting up big numbers and the Cavs are in 3rd place in the east a quarter of the way through the season? If they were in first place, I might agree with you. But, as of now, you could also make the case that they are underperforming what Mitchell did when he was with the Jazz when you look at how well the Jazz has performed without Mitchell. Mitchell and Gobert weren't traded because they were bad regular season players. They were traded because they couldn't get over the hump in the playoffs. Currently, the Cavs are behind the Celtics and the Bucks. I don't see them beating either team in the playoffs. For what the Cavs gave up, I would want to get to at least get to the conference finals. If the Cavs don't get past the second round, do you think the deal was a success?
The Knicks made a decision to walk away either because they actually felt the price was too high (which I strongly believe it was) or as part of a failed negotiating strategy that assumed there would not be any other offers and Ainge would cave (narrative of beat writers and content creators). It is possible / likely that both are true. At the end of the day, the Jazz asked for a lot (with most of the value coming from future picks) and the Cavs were willing to meet the price while the Knicks were not. As of today, we would be in the play-in as the 9 seed. There has been some / a lot of dysfunction. But, I am pleased with the decisions to bench Rose / Fournier and am looking forward to seeing the new 9 man rotation where everyone but Julius and Brunson is 24 or younger, i.e. we are now building around the young players for the most part.
Having said that, if the Cavs win a championship this season and Mitchell is the MVP of the finals and the Knicks don't make the play in with the young players, the Knicks will obviously have made the wrong decision. On the other hand, we just beat the Cavs and are only currently a game and a half out of the 6 seed. It's not out of the question that the (a) Indiana pivots to tanking for Wembayama, and (b) Durant / Embiid end up missing a bunch of games because of injuries, and the Knicks slide into the playoffs as the 6 seed vs the Cavs who are the 3 seed. Based on the trajectory of the two games played between the teams to date, I can see the Knicks playing the Cavs competitively in the series but only winning a game or too because Mitchell is the best player. If that happens and then the Cavs go on to exit in a second round loss to the Bucks in 5 or 6 games, I think the Cavs would look at the Mitchell trade as a disappointment and I think the Knicks would feel like they made the right decision to pass on Mitchell (not because he isn't a great player but rather because he is who he was with the Jazz an all-star but not a 1st or 2nd team all-NBA 2-way player who can be the best player on a championship team).
Bottom line .... it is waaaaay too early to see who was right and who was wrong.
It’s an epic failure by the Knicks again! They’ve been in a perpetual rebuild for the last 20 years and now had their chance to get a young elite player that could make them a very good team and with some tweaking of the roster over the next couple of years using more of their assets could have made them a championship contender. No team in the NBA is winning a championship without at least one elite player, the Knick now don’t even have an all star on their roster. So unfortunately it looks like we’re heading towards another 20 year rebuild again because this GM is not capable of making good decisions to improve this team. The Knicks also have the worst talent evaluators in the league that over the years passed up on multiple future all stars in the draft, including Mitchell!
yeah, the fact that Mitchell is 25 and has three years left on his (relatively affordable) contract is salt in the wound
I normally like what you write. But, this is a snarky article. It would have been a lot more interesting if you actually wrote an article about how it is way too early to make a determination which could have incorporated all the plus points you mentioned + something like the following
Everyone knows that Mitchell is an all-star and a great offensive player. The Jazz were the #1 seed in the West a couple of years ago with Mitchell / Gobert. I don't recall their exact record, but the Cavs were a very good team in the first part of the regular season last year before injuries started piling up. So, is it unexpected / particularly impressive that Mitchell is putting up big numbers and the Cavs are in 3rd place in the east a quarter of the way through the season? If they were in first place, I might agree with you. But, as of now, you could also make the case that they are underperforming what Mitchell did when he was with the Jazz when you look at how well the Jazz has performed without Mitchell. Mitchell and Gobert weren't traded because they were bad regular season players. They were traded because they couldn't get over the hump in the playoffs. Currently, the Cavs are behind the Celtics and the Bucks. I don't see them beating either team in the playoffs. For what the Cavs gave up, I would want to get to at least get to the conference finals. If the Cavs don't get past the second round, do you think the deal was a success?
The Knicks made a decision to walk away either because they actually felt the price was too high (which I strongly believe it was) or as part of a failed negotiating strategy that assumed there would not be any other offers and Ainge would cave (narrative of beat writers and content creators). It is possible / likely that both are true. At the end of the day, the Jazz asked for a lot (with most of the value coming from future picks) and the Cavs were willing to meet the price while the Knicks were not. As of today, we would be in the play-in as the 9 seed. There has been some / a lot of dysfunction. But, I am pleased with the decisions to bench Rose / Fournier and am looking forward to seeing the new 9 man rotation where everyone but Julius and Brunson is 24 or younger, i.e. we are now building around the young players for the most part.
Having said that, if the Cavs win a championship this season and Mitchell is the MVP of the finals and the Knicks don't make the play in with the young players, the Knicks will obviously have made the wrong decision. On the other hand, we just beat the Cavs and are only currently a game and a half out of the 6 seed. It's not out of the question that the (a) Indiana pivots to tanking for Wembayama, and (b) Durant / Embiid end up missing a bunch of games because of injuries, and the Knicks slide into the playoffs as the 6 seed vs the Cavs who are the 3 seed. Based on the trajectory of the two games played between the teams to date, I can see the Knicks playing the Cavs competitively in the series but only winning a game or too because Mitchell is the best player. If that happens and then the Cavs go on to exit in a second round loss to the Bucks in 5 or 6 games, I think the Cavs would look at the Mitchell trade as a disappointment and I think the Knicks would feel like they made the right decision to pass on Mitchell (not because he isn't a great player but rather because he is who he was with the Jazz an all-star but not a 1st or 2nd team all-NBA 2-way player who can be the best player on a championship team).
Bottom line .... it is waaaaay too early to see who was right and who was wrong.