RealGM

...

While trae is the best player here in my eyes, I think mitchell isn't massively behind, and Garland is significantly better than Dejounte.

I actually view Garland and dejounte in completely opposite lights, with Garland being one of most underrated players currently, his net rating lineup numbers are absurd and he seems like a prime candidate for nerds to catch on first to his impact similarly to someone like 13/14 curry.

Dejounte on the other hand I view as massively overrated due to his gaudy well rounded basic points/reb/assist splits. I don't see him as a huge primary advantage creator, and his lack of spacing hurts his value as a secondary option where he's best suited. Great defensively but a little overrated on that end too for my liking. Just not a huge fan of his and wouldn't of had him as an all star.

BIGJ1ER wrote:While trae is the best player here in my eyes, I think mitchell isn't massively behind, and Garland is significantly better than Dejounte.

I actually view Garland and dejounte in completely opposite lights, with Garland being one of most underrated players currently, his net rating lineup numbers are absurd and he seems like a prime candidate for nerds to catch on first to his impact similarly to someone like 13/14 curry.

Dejounte on the other hand I view as massively overrated due to his gaudy well rounded basic points/reb/assist splits. I don't see him as a huge primary advantage creator, and his lack of spacing hurts his value as a secondary option where he's best suited. Great defensively but a little overrated on that end too for my liking. Just not a huge fan of his and wouldn't of had him as an all star.

DM is quite overrated. His defense was some of the worst I had seen in last years playoffs, while offense wasn't anything spectacular. Trae Young is quite comfortably better. TY is a borderline top 15 player. While DM is around a top 30.

Hawks, though I believe Mitchell > Young > Murray > Garland.

Statlanta wrote:Hawks, though I believe Mitchell > Young > Murray > Garland.

Not sure how DM over Young. Their defense is borderline a wash.

Young is comfortably better as a scorer. (More consistent) and most def as a passer.

Also Young went deeper than the Jazz ever did in the playoffs while DM had the best supporting star in Rudy.

Imo Trae Young is probably around a 89/90, while DM is an 87.

Tbh it's Trae > Dejounte > onovan Mitchell > Garlan

I think the big question right now is how well each duo works on the court together. That matters more to me than how we rate them as individuals.

I like the Cavs duo on both ability and fit here

mdonnelly1989 wrote:

BIGJ1ER wrote:While trae is the best player here in my eyes, I think mitchell isn't massively behind, and Garland is significantly better than Dejounte.

I actually view Garland and dejounte in completely opposite lights, with Garland being one of most underrated players currently, his net rating lineup numbers are absurd and he seems like a prime candidate for nerds to catch on first to his impact similarly to someone like 13/14 curry.

Dejounte on the other hand I view as massively overrated due to his gaudy well rounded basic points/reb/assist splits. I don't see him as a huge primary advantage creator, and his lack of spacing hurts his value as a secondary option where he's best suited. Great defensively but a little overrated on that end too for my liking. Just not a huge fan of his and wouldn't of had him as an all star.

DM is quite overrated. His defense was some of the worst I had seen in last years playoffs, while offense wasn't anything spectacular. Trae Young is quite comfortably better. TY is a borderline top 15 player. While DM is around a top 30.

I would argue Trae's defense was equivalent or worse than DM's in the playoffs last year. And while Trae is probably a better player at this point, I question his ability to improve defensively much more than I do DM's.

I’m probably the lone person on this forum who prefers Garland to all of the other three.

When 4 players are being discussed, and 2 have the initials of "DM"...

yoyoboy wrote:I’m probably the lone person on this forum who prefers Garland to all of the other three.

I think if I had to pick one to build around right now it would be Garland. He knows how to run a team while also being a solid shooter. Hopefully Mitchell doesn't get in the way of that.

Cavsfansince84 wrote:

yoyoboy wrote:I’m probably the lone person on this forum who prefers Garland to all of the other three.

I think if I had to pick one to build around right now it would be Garland. He knows how to run a team while also being a solid shooter. Hopefully Mitchell doesn't get in the way of that.

2nded, I've been very high on Garland since the draft and wish I had some written proof of that lol. While I think the Hawks are ahead right now, if Mitchell can even somewhat live up to his defensive potential and Garland takes another step I would probably choose the Cavs.

I think Trae is the best offensive player here clearly, but he's the one guy even worse somehow than Spida defensively. Murray is okay defensively, though overrated, but I think he will struggle off ball and moving Trae more off to accommodate him would be self-defeating. I think the Hawks are going to struggle to get the most out of their two guys.

Cleveland may do a lot of my turn/your turn, but both guys are still useful off-ball. Defense is going to be a challenge. This idea that Mobley/Allen can just clean everything up is false hope. We saw Rudy freaking Gobert couldn't do that in Utah so no chance those guys are.

I'd rather have the Cleveland duo I think. Trae is such a special offensive player, but you simply can't be that bad on defense. He's got to get up to just plain bad, and not worst defender in the league by miles level. The physical challenges will always be there, but he's got to give effort and he's shown zero interest so far. Mitchell is similar but I think he got so embarrassed by Luka and Dallas that his pride may kick in and he's got the tools to be neutral if he wants to be.

Texas Chuck wrote:I think Trae is the best offensive player here clearly, but he's the one guy even worse somehow than Spida defensively. Murray is okay defensively, though overrated, but I think he will struggle off ball and moving Trae more off to accommodate him would be self-defeating. I think the Hawks are going to struggle to get the most out of their two guys.

Cleveland may do a lot of my turn/your turn, but both guys are still useful off-ball. Defense is going to be a challenge. This idea that Mobley/Allen can just clean everything up is false hope. We saw Rudy freaking Gobert couldn't do that in Utah so no chance those guys are.

I'd rather have the Cleveland duo I think. Trae is such a special offensive player, but you simply can't be that bad on defense. He's got to get up to just plain bad, and not worst defender in the league by miles level. The physical challenges will always be there, but he's got to give effort and he's shown zero interest so far. Mitchell is similar but I think he got so embarrassed by Luka and Dallas that his pride may kick in and he's got the tools to be neutral if he wants to be.

Overall I'd agree with what you said except the bolded. Two very long dudes in the paint who are rim protectors are going to cover a lot more ground than just one does even if its a guy like Rudy. I mean Mobley by himself may be on Rudy's level within a couple years and I'd say he covers more ground than Rudy does. His quickness at his height is insane.

I went Hawks because Dejonte can play d.Trae is the best shooter/playmaker of the bunch too. But it's close, for sure.

From a talent standpoint I think Trae is clearly better than Mitchell, and Murray is also better than Garland.

From an offensive fit standpoint, it's easier to see Garland and Mitchell meshing, since both can shoot from deep. If the Hawks are to be successful, either Trae needs to work much harder off ball to get open, or Murray needs to significantly improve his shooting, because Capela/Okongwu are going to clog the lane.

Defensively, everyone other than Murray is a mess here, so I think both backcourts are going to struggle, albeit in different ways. The Hawks are going to struggle when folks can successfully hunt Trae, but Murray can at least pressure the initial wing defender. The Cavs are just going to struggle more generally, where teams can drive on both guards.

azuresou1 wrote:From a talent standpoint (...) Murray is also better than Garland.

Oh hell no he isn't. Garland's just had a better season than Murray and he's much younger.

Jaivl wrote:

azuresou1 wrote:From a talent standpoint (...) Murray is also better than Garland.

Oh hell no he isn't. Garland's just had a better season than Murray and he's much younger.

But now he's in a Hawks jersey.

But yeah you pretty much had to be actively avoiding the NBA last year to not realize what a fantastic year Garland had and the talent difference here is stark. Murray stuffed a box score to be sure, but he's a really inefficient scorer and last year was the first year of his career he was any kind of positive on the offensive end at all. His defense isn't closing that gap.

I think Trae is the biggest talent here but Murray is definitely the least.