Donovan Mitchell wants to be traded to Nets, Knicks or Heat - The Athletic

[vincecarter4pres]

Mitchell is overhyped imo. Volume scorer with mediocre efficiency, and plays no defense. When healthy, both Gobert AND Conley were better.

Conley? Lol bruh...

[Riconet]

The point about Simmons is valid.

Hes still young though and it would be foolish to write him off.

Simmons was also in a bad fit in Philly where he needed to be a secondary offensive creator. This won't be an issue on the Nets with so much offensive firepower.

Lastly, even if we wanted to move off Simmons it would be better to do so for 3 & D players. Not someone like Mitchell who gives us more of what we have an is bad on defense.

Trading Kyrie also makes no sense since he basically has no trade value and is an expiring contract to any team that gets hin.

I agree with most of this, and the reasons I think Simmons-for-Mitchell make sense are more intangible than tangible. I also think it's not very likely to happen.

But still -- Simmons is 26. That's not really young by NBA standards -- in fact it's pretty close to the age where I think an NBA player is who he is. (Although to be fair, he's only played 275 games -- he missed all of his first season and his most recent season, and his most recent 2 seasons in which he played were both Covid-affected -- so he's really only had 2 full "normal" seasons.)

More importantly, I think Marks and Tsai have become 100% convinced (as am I) that you cannot be a real contender without true buy-in, focus and determination, especially from your max guys -- and it's reasonably likely that they've also become convinced that both Kyrie and Simmons are fatally deficient in those areas. (It's also somewhat likely that KD has become convinced of this, but that's another conversation.)

So I would not be very surprised if Simmons or Kyrie or both of them were not on the team by the time the season starts. And I don't think there is a better asset than Mitchell that could return in a Simmons or Kyrie trade at this point.

[MrDollarBills]

The point about Simmons is valid.

Hes still young though and it would be foolish to write him off.

Simmons was also in a bad fit in Philly where he needed to be a secondary offensive creator. This won't be an issue on the Nets with so much offensive firepower.

Lastly, even if we wanted to move off Simmons it would be better to do so for 3 & D players. Not someone like Mitchell who gives us more of what we have an is bad on defense.

Trading Kyrie also makes no sense since he basically has no trade value and is an expiring contract to any team that gets hin.

I agree with most of this, and the reasons I think Simmons-for-Mitchell make sense are more intangible than tangible. I also think it's not very likely to happen.

But still -- Simmons is 26. That's not really young by NBA standards -- in fact it's pretty close to the age where I think an NBA player is who he is. (Although to be fair, he's only played 275 games -- he missed all of his first season and his most recent season, and his most recent 2 seasons in which he played were both Covid-affected -- so he's really only had 2 full "normal" seasons.)

More importantly, I think Marks and Tsai have become 100% convinced (as am I) that you cannot be a real contender without true buy-in, focus and determination, especially from your max guys -- and it's reasonably likely that they've also become convinced that both Kyrie and Simmons are fatally deficient in those areas. (It's also somewhat likely that KD has become convinced of this, but that's another conversation.)

So I would not be very surprised if Simmons or Kyrie or both of them were not on the team by the time the season starts. And I don't think there is a better asset than Mitchell that could return in a Simmons or Kyrie trade at this point.

if we had traded KD to Boston, then yes I would entertain this. But now? No sense in doing it. Ben gives us intangibles that we need more than volume scoring.

[Riconet]

if we had traded KD to Boston, then yes I would entertain this. But now? No sense in doing it. Ben gives us intangibles that we need more than volume scoring.

Well, I think it depends on what you mean by “intangibles“. It sounds like you are referring to defense, size and playmaking, and I agree that those are important qualities that Simmons brings to the table. I am thinking more of intangibles like toughness, intensity and leadership. I think Tsai and Marks have decided that those qualities are really important,and are lacking in the current roster (which I agree with), and I don’t think Simmons provides those intangibles.

[Netaman]

So i was trying to think of ways this could work, how would anyone feel about this deal?
http://www.espn.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=2jmdo5bg

Pretty simple:

Nets get Poetl (extends), Mitchell
Spurs get Simmons (for Poetl and pick(s), 1 protected 1st?)
Utah gets all tradeable picks from Nets, 1 protected pick from SAS, Cam Thomas

I'm pretty firmly in the camp that Simmons' unique fit may be worth the risk. But the risk is undeniable.

Poetl and Mitchell would give the nets 2 prime aged building blocks beyond Kyrie/KD. They are a legitimate foundation that can be built on if Kyrie/KD need to get dealt in season.

Mitchell
Irving
O'neale
KD
Poetl

is a pretty balanced starting 5 with a solid bench (Claxton, Curry, Harris, Patty).

[3pt_chucker]

I just can't get behind a Mitchell-Irving backcourt. Recipe for disaster.

Only reason Harden-KD-KAI worked was because HArden is a legit playmaker/PG and KD and KAI are hyper efficient.

Mitchell is ball dominant and needs volume for efficiency. Offense would be ugly iso-ball even more so than it is now.

Add in they are both midgets and bad defensively and I second round exit written all over that core.

I think this is only considered if Ben is garbage(unlikely) and Nets want to flip him for another star.

[TheNetsFan]

Mitchell can sign here in 2025.

[Hello Brooklyn]

My number 1 concern for this team is defense by far.

I feel like we still don't have good defense.

We have no rim protector to guard Giannis or Embiid.

KD just shouldn't be asked to be our best defender at his age. He can't do it.

Mitchell is a BAD defender. Look at how he got cooked in the playoffs.

Simmons is one of the best defenders in the NBA.

He is something we have never really had in Brooklyn. When was the last time we had a GREAT defender on this team. Jason Kidd?

Even if Mitchell is the best player giving up Simmons is a non-starter for me.

If anything we should be looking to add another defensive big. Mitchell is simply not what we need at all.

Whats our new lineup going to be?

Kyrie/Mitchell/Harris/KD/Claxton

GOOD LUCK stopping anybody.

[GTR11]

if we had traded KD to Boston, then yes I would entertain this. But now? No sense in doing it. Ben gives us intangibles that we need more than volume scoring.

Well, I think it depends on what you mean by “intangibles“. It sounds like you are referring to defense, size and playmaking, and I agree that those are important qualities that Simmons brings to the table. I am thinking more of intangibles like toughness, intensity and leadership. I think Tsai and Marks have decided that those qualities are really important,and are lacking in the current roster (which I agree with), and I don’t think Simmons provides those intangibles.

1. You asking him to be player coach. Something that Kyrie and KD spoke about. How did that worked out...

Spida compared to Ben is useless luxury on this team. He provides half of what Kyrie is ( when a avaliable ) and that's saying a lot. Why trading top 5 perimeter D player for undersized liability on D?

2. A lot of assumptions that contradict FO actions. They did exactly opposite to what you saying.

[GTR11]

Spida just bad fit on this team. Thinking he will be Harden 2.0 laughable. Tsai traded for top 3 player who was MVP level player. Spida will never reach that level, not his game.

[MrDollarBills]

Mitchell can sign here in 2025.

Exactly.

No sense in giving up anything in a situation where Ainge clearly wants to rob someone blind for a player who imo is good but not great.