Mitch Available!?

[thebuzzardman]

Any trade that we have to aggregate outgoing salaries would hard cap us on the second apron.

So there is no trade that can land the Knicks Bridges or PG...or basically anyone not a role player, correct?

Not sure this is correct but this is my understanding: Bogs makes 19million next year. In a trade a 25% difference in salaries is allowed which would gives us a +- 4.75mill. margin in straight up trades. Like you could trade Bogs somewhere for a player making 23.75mill. which basically is the range some star players are at. Not all-star or superstar players but guys like Kuzma (23.5mill.) for example. Interestingly DJM makes 25mill. which means that almost any reasonable trade for him would have to include an aggregation of salaries putting us at the second apron. By virtue of these cap rules you can pretty much exclude the Knicks from any DJM trade for example.....of course this is all assuming I'm understanding things correctly. I originally thought the aggregation thing only applies to the Bogs contract...

I don't think there is a single star making 23 million. No, Kuzma doesn't count.

Thanks for the explanation. IF you are correct, and I think this tracks with what dougbad (ruins vibes) and that pesky raptor fan always bringing in cap reality and bad feelings, then there is no way to execute a star trade, period, unless a team is trading another star.

Because, immediately, that team would be at the 2nd apron and face punitive measures.

I guess there is a scenario where a star player could go to a team under the cap, but that's it. They'd have to be way under, in effect being traded into cap space.

Like, pretend Batum isn't a FA. Batum gets traded for Paul George. Each team would be under the cap. The 76ers before the move, the Clippers after. (not that it matters)



Interesting side effect of this trade:
Teams like the Knicks, etc, just not quite elite enough, but wanting to get better, are basically screwed, since they'd face, what, 2 years of restrictions if they go 2nd apron?

Sh*tty rebuilding teams could still operate the old way, as long as they were under the cap.

But, wouldn't it make it almost easier for a dynasty team to make big trades?

Let's say Giannis is available. (Ignore the basketball philosophy parts for now). Why wouldn't the Celtics aggregate KP and Horford for Giannis - pretend the Celts are offering 5 picks, some not their own. They've already won a chip. Their core 2/3 (Brown/Tatum/White) is young, they could load up for another 3 - 5 years, why not, who cares about a few years of 2nd apron punishment?

Meanwhile, every other team trying to get better than a conference finals, minus OKC, kind of handcuffed, because any move they make that triggers the 2nd apron will be the move of any significance they make for 2 years, if I understand this part of the CBA correctly.

Those cusp contenders will have to be EXTREMELY cautious and sure about any larger trades. Meanwhile a team that is prime contender can make moves with more impunity.


I don't know. There might be an unintended consequence to this trade that promotes dynasties. Then again, that's what the NBA always wants.  

[thebuzzardman]

Now one responding to my treatise? *sad feelings*

[TGW]

Now one responding to my treatise? *sad feelings*

Sure. Your trade for Avidja was comical...let that one go. That same package for Kuzma would probably work, although the Tyus S&T part of it would have to be scrapped since he's technically a FA.

I think Robinson is neutral value at best coming off that injury. He's making pennies so it's begs the question as to why the Knicks would even consider trading him unless he's damaged goods, which I think is a distinct possibility.

[thebuzzardman]

Now one responding to my treatise? *sad feelings*

Sure. Your trade for Avidja was comical...let that one go. That same package for Kuzma would probably work, although the Tyus S&T part of it would have to be scrapped since he's technically a FA.

I think Robinson is neutral value at best coming off that injury. He's making pennies so it's begs the question as to why the Knicks would even consider trading him unless he's damaged goods, which I think is a distinct possibility.

The treatise in no way was about Kuzma.

The only reason I mentioned Avidja is that another poster thought the Knicks were interested, so, if the Knicks were looking to move Mitch, tried to see a way it would fit. For the record, I wouldn't think the Wiz are looking to move a young, versatile wing while they are rebuilding, and have said so in several other locations on here.

I guess the Knicks could get Kuzma, though it seems a bit dumb if Randle never plays C, since there are plenty of backup 4 minutes for OG and Hart, who Thibs seems to like to try and get into the lineup wherever he can.

I thought a FA like Tyus could be signed by his team and then traded, but I wasn't sure. Not that I'd be an advocate of trading big for small, even if the NBA is different now, and even though the Knicks could use a backup PG (sorry Deuce)

The treatise was about the fact that if teams can't combine salaries or immediate get the "2nd apron" penalty, then the only teams I'd think that would risk it are teams already deep chip contenders, probably even having already won one.
Because if a team feels it's on the cusp, would they really make a move, even a big one, where they are pretty handcuffed for another 2 years?

I think the new CBA cuts down on the super team, 3 stars thing for most teams, but the truly elite teams will still do it, because why not?

[8516knicks]

So, to sum up this thread, we basically can't get anyone good for Mitch.

[Jeffrey]

Deni and Bilal is pretty much their untouchables.

[FrozenEnvelope]

I'd trade iHart before I trade Mitch. We need Mitch as the playoffs showed us. We need his defensive presence against Tatum/Brown and his size against Embiid.

iHart filled in nicely during the regular season but showed he wasn't the answer in the playoffs aside from that one game. He was awful for the most part. I'd let him walk.

[8516knicks]

I'd trade iHart before I trade Mitch. We need Mitch as the playoffs showed us. We need his defensive presence against Tatum/Brown and his size against Embiid.

iHart filled in nicely during the regular season but showed he wasn't the answer in the playoffs aside from that one game. He was awful for the most part. I'd let him walk.

Embid was injured and I missed Mitch vs. the Celtics. Then, again, so did Mitch (as always).

[thebuzzardman]

I'd trade iHart before I trade Mitch. We need Mitch as the playoffs showed us. We need his defensive presence against Tatum/Brown and his size against Embiid.

iHart filled in nicely during the regular season but showed he wasn't the answer in the playoffs aside from that one game. He was awful for the most part. I'd let him walk.

Don't worry. The NBA has basically outlawed player movement

[NoDopeOnSundays]

I'd trade iHart before I trade Mitch. We need Mitch as the playoffs showed us. We need his defensive presence against Tatum/Brown and his size against Embiid.

iHart filled in nicely during the regular season but showed he wasn't the answer in the playoffs aside from that one game. He was awful for the most part. I'd let him walk.

Mitch has played 193 games in 4 seasons, he has been hurt in 2/3 of the playoffs runs we've made, he played in 6 games total in the playoffs this year. I don't think some of you really grasp how much this guy misses time, he's missed more games the last 4 years than Kristaps and Embiid, and he's only played 21 more games than Kawhi who missed an entire season.

Also, what impact is he supposed to have on Tatum and Brown? They're a 5 out team that pulls the opposing C out of the paint, he was awful against them this season, and you just saw them neutralize two rim runners on the Mavs.

[JayTWill]

People want to keep one injury prone center in Mitch for a possible matchup against another injury prone center in Embiid? We may have just witnessed a once in a lifetime event with both of them limping into the first round this year. What are the chances that the Knicks meet the Sixers again in the playoff with both of them being healthy?

[B8RcDeMktfxC]

People want to keep one injury prone center in Mitch for a possible matchup against another injury prone center in Embiid? We may have just witnessed a once in a lifetime event with both of them limping into the first round this year. What are the chances that the Knicks meet the Sixers again in the playoff with both of them being healthy?

Pretty **** high in comparison with every other possible playoff event. The Knicks and 76ers are very likely to be 2 and 3 in the East over the next two years. That makes them strong favourites to meet in the conference semis.

Yes, of course , other things can happen. But that is the thing with highest probability.

Now, should one plan for that or the smorgasbord of possibilities? Open question. The TWolves ambushing the Nuggets highlights the pro-Mitch case.

[8516knicks]

People want to keep one injury prone center in Mitch for a possible matchup against another injury prone center in Embiid? We may have just witnessed a once in a lifetime event with both of them limping into the first round this year. What are the chances that the Knicks meet the Sixers again in the playoff with both of them being healthy?

Pretty **** high in comparison with every other possible playoff event. The Knicks and 76ers are very likely to be 2 and 3 in the East over the next two years. That makes them strong favourites to meet in the conference semis.

Yes, of course , other things can happen. But that is the thing with highest probability.

Now, should one plan for that or the smorgasbord of possibilities? Open question. The TWolves ambushing the Nuggets highlights the pro-Mitch case.

But the Mavs ambushing the TWolves highights the opposite.

[Richard4444]

Any trade that we have to aggregate outgoing salaries would hard cap us on the second apron.

So there is no trade that can land the Knicks Bridges or PG...or basically anyone not a role player, correct?

Not sure this is correct but this is my understanding: Bogs makes 19million next year. In a trade a 25% difference in salaries is allowed which would gives us a +- 4.75mill. margin in straight up trades. Like you could trade Bogs somewhere for a player making 23.75mill. which basically is the range some star players are at. Not all-star or superstar players but guys like Kuzma (23.5mill.) for example. Interestingly DJM makes 25mill. which means that almost any reasonable trade for him would have to include an aggregation of salaries putting us at the second apron. By virtue of these cap rules you can pretty much exclude the Knicks from any DJM trade for example.....of course this is all assuming I'm understanding things correctly. I originally thought the aggregation thing only applies to the Bogs contract...

If we use the 125% rule, we get hard capped in the first apron. To get Kuzma, you can not give more salary than you receive or be hard-capped into the first apron.

[JayTWill]

People want to keep one injury prone center in Mitch for a possible matchup against another injury prone center in Embiid? We may have just witnessed a once in a lifetime event with both of them limping into the first round this year. What are the chances that the Knicks meet the Sixers again in the playoff with both of them being healthy?

Pretty **** high in comparison with every other possible playoff event. The Knicks and 76ers are very likely to be 2 and 3 in the East over the next two years. That makes them strong favourites to meet in the conference semis.

Yes, of course , other things can happen. But that is the thing with highest probability.

Now, should one plan for that or the smorgasbord of possibilities? Open question. The TWolves ambushing the Nuggets highlights the pro-Mitch case.

Could the Sixers and Knicks meet again in next postseason after not playing them since the 80's? Sure. Could Embiid and Mitch both possibly be healthy into and through the playoffs until they meet up next postseason? Sure. Would I bet on both of those things happening? No. Would I keep an injury prone Mitch on the team just for the possibility of a matchup against a guy who just turned 30 with his own severe injury history that has never advanced to the conference finals? No

[Jose7]

Mitch gotta go. Never seen someone more unreliable get every chance in the world.

Would be interested in a 3 team trade to get some shootin/backcourt help

[Zenzibar]

Now one responding to my treatise? *sad feelings*

Sure. Your trade for Avidja was comical...let that one go. That same package for Kuzma would probably work, although the Tyus S&T part of it would have to be scrapped since he's technically a FA.

I think Robinson is neutral value at best coming off that injury. He's making pennies so it's begs the question as to why the Knicks would even consider trading him unless he's damaged goods, which I think is a distinct possibility.

The treatise in no way was about Kuzma.

The only reason I mentioned Avidja is that another poster thought the Knicks were interested, so, if the Knicks were looking to move Mitch, tried to see a way it would fit. For the record, I wouldn't think the Wiz are looking to move a young, versatile wing while they are rebuilding, and have said so in several other locations on here.

I guess the Knicks could get Kuzma, though it seems a bit dumb if Randle never plays C, since there are plenty of backup 4 minutes for OG and Hart, who Thibs seems to like to try and get into the lineup wherever he can.

I thought a FA like Tyus could be signed by his team and then traded, but I wasn't sure. Not that I'd be an advocate of trading big for small, even if the NBA is different now, and even though the Knicks could use a backup PG (sorry Deuce)

The treatise was about the fact that if teams can't combine salaries or immediate get the "2nd apron" penalty, then the only teams I'd think that would risk it are teams already deep chip contenders, probably even having already won one.
Because if a team feels it's on the cusp, would they really make a move, even a big one, where they are pretty handcuffed for another 2 years?

I think the new CBA cuts down on the super team, 3 stars thing for most teams, but the truly elite teams will still do it, because why not?

.

OK, I'll respond.

Washington wants their pick back 2025 #1, top 10 protected. This one is huge! There may be possibilities that Washington will tank this year and avoid the Knicks having even a chance at a top 15 pick.

The Knicks are not giving them Mitch, that great pick and another pick for just Kuzma and Tyus. We have Deuce as the backup point guard, who is getting better. Also Kuzma will not push Donte to the bench as he shot only 33% from 3, compared to 40.1% for the big Ragu. Kuzma makes $23m plus per and signed for 3 more years and not salary friendly.

They have Daniel Gafford at center and doubt he's coming back here in a trade. He makes what Mitch makes and therefore will not provide any salary relief.

But I can be wrong.

The Wizard will have to at least swap next year's pick for a future and better positioned #1.

[thebuzzardman]

Sure. Your trade for Avidja was comical...let that one go. That same package for Kuzma would probably work, although the Tyus S&T part of it would have to be scrapped since he's technically a FA.

I think Robinson is neutral value at best coming off that injury. He's making pennies so it's begs the question as to why the Knicks would even consider trading him unless he's damaged goods, which I think is a distinct possibility.

The treatise in no way was about Kuzma.

The only reason I mentioned Avidja is that another poster thought the Knicks were interested, so, if the Knicks were looking to move Mitch, tried to see a way it would fit. For the record, I wouldn't think the Wiz are looking to move a young, versatile wing while they are rebuilding, and have said so in several other locations on here.

I guess the Knicks could get Kuzma, though it seems a bit dumb if Randle never plays C, since there are plenty of backup 4 minutes for OG and Hart, who Thibs seems to like to try and get into the lineup wherever he can.

I thought a FA like Tyus could be signed by his team and then traded, but I wasn't sure. Not that I'd be an advocate of trading big for small, even if the NBA is different now, and even though the Knicks could use a backup PG (sorry Deuce)

The treatise was about the fact that if teams can't combine salaries or immediate get the "2nd apron" penalty, then the only teams I'd think that would risk it are teams already deep chip contenders, probably even having already won one.
Because if a team feels it's on the cusp, would they really make a move, even a big one, where they are pretty handcuffed for another 2 years?

I think the new CBA cuts down on the super team, 3 stars thing for most teams, but the truly elite teams will still do it, because why not?

.

OK, I'll respond.

Washington wants their pick back 2025 #1, top 10 protected. This one is huge! There may be possibilities that Washington will tank this year and avoid the Knicks having even a chance at a top 15 pick.

The Knicks are not giving them Mitch, that great pick and another pick for just Kuzma and Tyus. We have Deuce as the backup point guard, who is getting better. Also Kuzma will not push Donte to the bench as he shot only 33% from 3, compared to 40.1% for the big Ragu. Kuzma makes $23m plus per and signed for 3 more years and not salary friendly.

They have Daniel Gafford at center and doubt he's coming back here in a trade. He makes what Mitch makes and therefore will not provide any salary relief.

But I can be wrong.

The Wizard will have to at least swap next year's pick for a future and better positioned #1.

Gafford was traded to the Mavs

My main point is that the new CBA will discourage all but the top teams from trading for stars.

Even that might be overstated. It sure as sh*t made player movement more difficult. Interesting that the players association was ok with it.

[Fencer reregistered]

So there is no trade that can land the Knicks Bridges or PG...or basically anyone not a role player, correct?

Not sure this is correct but this is my understanding: Bogs makes 19million next year. In a trade a 25% difference in salaries is allowed which would gives us a +- 4.75mill. margin in straight up trades. Like you could trade Bogs somewhere for a player making 23.75mill. which basically is the range some star players are at. Not all-star or superstar players but guys like Kuzma (23.5mill.) for example. Interestingly DJM makes 25mill. which means that almost any reasonable trade for him would have to include an aggregation of salaries putting us at the second apron. By virtue of these cap rules you can pretty much exclude the Knicks from any DJM trade for example.....of course this is all assuming I'm understanding things correctly. I originally thought the aggregation thing only applies to the Bogs contract...

I don't think there is a single star making 23 million. No, Kuzma doesn't count.

Thanks for the explanation. IF you are correct, and I think this tracks with what dougbad (ruins vibes) and that pesky raptor fan always bringing in cap reality and bad feelings, then there is no way to execute a star trade, period, unless a team is trading another star.

Because, immediately, that team would be at the 2nd apron and face punitive measures.

I guess there is a scenario where a star player could go to a team under the cap, but that's it. They'd have to be way under, in effect being traded into cap space.

Like, pretend Batum isn't a FA. Batum gets traded for Paul George. Each team would be under the cap. The 76ers before the move, the Clippers after. (not that it matters)



Interesting side effect of this trade:
Teams like the Knicks, etc, just not quite elite enough, but wanting to get better, are basically screwed, since they'd face, what, 2 years of restrictions if they go 2nd apron?

Sh*tty rebuilding teams could still operate the old way, as long as they were under the cap.

But, wouldn't it make it almost easier for a dynasty team to make big trades?

Let's say Giannis is available. (Ignore the basketball philosophy parts for now). Why wouldn't the Celtics aggregate KP and Horford for Giannis - pretend the Celts are offering 5 picks, some not their own. They've already won a chip. Their core 2/3 (Brown/Tatum/White) is young, they could load up for another 3 - 5 years, why not, who cares about a few years of 2nd apron punishment?

Meanwhile, every other team trying to get better than a conference finals, minus OKC, kind of handcuffed, because any move they make that triggers the 2nd apron will be the move of any significance they make for 2 years, if I understand this part of the CBA correctly.

Those cusp contenders will have to be EXTREMELY cautious and sure about any larger trades. Meanwhile a team that is prime contender can make moves with more impunity.


I don't know. There might be an unintended consequence to this trade that promotes dynasties. Then again, that's what the NBA always wants.  

Second apron teams can't aggregate.

[thebuzzardman]

Not sure this is correct but this is my understanding: Bogs makes 19million next year. In a trade a 25% difference in salaries is allowed which would gives us a +- 4.75mill. margin in straight up trades. Like you could trade Bogs somewhere for a player making 23.75mill. which basically is the range some star players are at. Not all-star or superstar players but guys like Kuzma (23.5mill.) for example. Interestingly DJM makes 25mill. which means that almost any reasonable trade for him would have to include an aggregation of salaries putting us at the second apron. By virtue of these cap rules you can pretty much exclude the Knicks from any DJM trade for example.....of course this is all assuming I'm understanding things correctly. I originally thought the aggregation thing only applies to the Bogs contract...

I don't think there is a single star making 23 million. No, Kuzma doesn't count.

Thanks for the explanation. IF you are correct, and I think this tracks with what dougbad (ruins vibes) and that pesky raptor fan always bringing in cap reality and bad feelings, then there is no way to execute a star trade, period, unless a team is trading another star.

Because, immediately, that team would be at the 2nd apron and face punitive measures.

I guess there is a scenario where a star player could go to a team under the cap, but that's it. They'd have to be way under, in effect being traded into cap space.

Like, pretend Batum isn't a FA. Batum gets traded for Paul George. Each team would be under the cap. The 76ers before the move, the Clippers after. (not that it matters)



Interesting side effect of this trade:
Teams like the Knicks, etc, just not quite elite enough, but wanting to get better, are basically screwed, since they'd face, what, 2 years of restrictions if they go 2nd apron?

Sh*tty rebuilding teams could still operate the old way, as long as they were under the cap.

But, wouldn't it make it almost easier for a dynasty team to make big trades?

Let's say Giannis is available. (Ignore the basketball philosophy parts for now). Why wouldn't the Celtics aggregate KP and Horford for Giannis - pretend the Celts are offering 5 picks, some not their own. They've already won a chip. Their core 2/3 (Brown/Tatum/White) is young, they could load up for another 3 - 5 years, why not, who cares about a few years of 2nd apron punishment?

Meanwhile, every other team trying to get better than a conference finals, minus OKC, kind of handcuffed, because any move they make that triggers the 2nd apron will be the move of any significance they make for 2 years, if I understand this part of the CBA correctly.

Those cusp contenders will have to be EXTREMELY cautious and sure about any larger trades. Meanwhile a team that is prime contender can make moves with more impunity.


I don't know. There might be an unintended consequence to this trade that promotes dynasties. Then again, that's what the NBA always wants.  

Second apron teams can't aggregate.

Are they 2nd apron already?

Or, the trade would make them a 2nd apron team, and it can't go through?