Mitchell Robinson's Trade Value

[Texas Chuck]

I mean trying to say hey he's more available than this really hurt guy isn't the flex you guys think it is. Nor would teams be deciding between the two.

Fine player, but I think we should all understand nobody is likely to give up anything of value for him.

[spree8]

I mean trying to say hey he's more available than this really hurt guy isn't the flex you guys think it is. Nor would teams be deciding between the two.

Fine player, but I think we should all understand nobody is likely to give up anything of value for him.

Why don’t you quote people when making passive aggressive responses to their posts? Never understood that.

I’m not “flexing” anything tho. You don’t know what teams would give for him so I’m not sure why you’re pretending your opinion is fact. Like I wouldn’t have thought Luka could be had for someone hurt more often than Mitch, but he was.

[Karmaloop]

I mean trying to say hey he's more available than this really hurt guy isn't the flex you guys think it is. Nor would teams be deciding between the two.

Fine player, but I think we should all understand nobody is likely to give up anything of value for him.

To be fair, I probably shouldn't have spoken in hyperbole in that original post I made.

[Texas Chuck]

I mean trying to say hey he's more available than this really hurt guy isn't the flex you guys think it is. Nor would teams be deciding between the two.

Fine player, but I think we should all understand nobody is likely to give up anything of value for him.

Why don’t you quote people when making passive aggressive responses to their posts? Never understood that.

I’m not “flexing” anything tho. You don’t know what teams would give for him so I’m not sure why you’re pretending your opinion is fact. Like I wouldn’t have thought Luka could be had for someone hurt more often than Mitch, but he was.

I forgot some posters need me to spell out imo when all our posts are like just our opinion, man.

And not quoting isn't anything, but quoting you here so you have less to complain about.

[spree8]

I mean trying to say hey he's more available than this really hurt guy isn't the flex you guys think it is. Nor would teams be deciding between the two.

Fine player, but I think we should all understand nobody is likely to give up anything of value for him.

Why don’t you quote people when making passive aggressive responses to their posts? Never understood that.

I’m not “flexing” anything tho. You don’t know what teams would give for him so I’m not sure why you’re pretending your opinion is fact. Like I wouldn’t have thought Luka could be had for someone hurt more often than Mitch, but he was.

I forgot some posters need me to spell out imo when all our posts are like just our opinion, man.

And not quoting isn't anything, but quoting you here so you have less to complain about.

“I think we should all understand nobody is likely to give up anything of value for him”… like you’re some kind of tyrant declaring what we should all believe his value to be… nothing. Like dude, get over yourself already. It’s a tired shtick.

[Texas Chuck]

It's literally me expressing an opinion. If you are reading it as if I'm a tyrant that's 100% on you. Your actual problem is I'm not saying his value is high. I wouldn't be hearing a single complaint about how I post if I posted something you liked.

Again, this is stupid. Tell me why I'm wrong and why he will return a bunch of value if you can. But this is just sad man.

[spree8]

It's literally me expressing an opinion. If you are reading it as if I'm a tyrant that's 100% on you. Your actual problem is I'm not saying his value is high. I wouldn't be hearing a single complaint about how I post if I posted something you liked.

Again, this is stupid. Tell me why I'm wrong and why he will return a bunch of value if you can. But this is just sad man.

No I don’t care if you don’t think his value is high at all. A lot of people in here said what I think is a fair assessment… that he’s probably more valuable to the Knicks compared to what they’d get in return given the injuries, so they’re better off keeping him. Nothing wrong with that. I may not agree, because we really don’t know, but it’s a reasonable take.

My issue is with you interjecting yourself into my debate with the other guy and coming at me (as usual) and trying to lay down the law that “I should understand” his value is low. Truth is nobody knows what his value is to every team, it’s speculation, that’s what we do here.

I bring up the Luka deal, not to take a shot at you, but because we’re talking about a guy made of glass who literally has countless non contact injuries, just traded for a top 3-5 player. Yet one of the best offensive rebounders ever has zero trade value?

[taikibansei]

Thibs then out of nowhere changed the starting lineup to a lineup he basically never used outside of 9 total minutes together. He tried to keep the same rotation schedule with KAT of coming out around the 5 minute mark but that forced Mitch to stay out there for almost the entire quarter and he clearly wasn't conditioned to do that especially when trying to coverup the Knicks poor defense against a team like the Pacers.

Wasn't really out of nowhere. It was out of the Knicks not having an impact and needing a shakeup to try and grasp for some wins with the season on the line.

You've both got a good exchange going, really highlighting the strengths and limitations of Mitch. I just wanted to take a second to comment on the bits in bold.

Knicks fans had been begging for usage of this lineup variation for months. Indeed, I'd assumed at the beginning of this season (i.e., when Mitch was still injured) that we'd be doing this at key moments almost every game once Mitch got back. And we saw evidence of how devastating that combination could be against the Pacers--e.g., Mitch's play in the 3rd quarter of Game 5, when he had multiple defensive stops and a key offensive rebound/score. The Pacers had no real answer for Mitch beyond Carlisle resorting to hack-a-Mitch immediately to get him off the court. (Which, to Carlisle's credit, he quickly recognized and resorted to.)

Unfortunately, this lineup didn't happen until, as Scoot mentions, Thibs got desperate at the very end of the season (a rigidity of thinking that--despite his strengths--ultimately cost Thibs his job, imo). And who knows, maybe if Thibs had tried these kinds of lineups earlier in the season, Mitch would have been more ready for the extended minutes against the Pacers? (Regardless, Mitch needs to work on his free throw shooting.... )

As for Mitch's trade value...as I've posted before, he's worth more to the Knicks than he would be to anybody else right now. More to the point, that's not going to change unless and until Mitch proves he can play 70+ games a year over consecutive years--and if he finally does this, why trade him?

[ReggiesKnicks]

The problem with Robinson is similar to Robert Williams III. Both are exceptional per-minute defensive Centers who offer enough offensively where they can play playoff minutes when healthy. The issue is they have some limitations offensively and are often injured with chronic-type injuries.

In the case of Robinson, you need a 1A or 1B Center who can stay healthy, like KAT/Hartenstein were. The advantage of KAT is he can play alongside Mitchell Robinson when Mitch is healthy and then can play full-time center for the extended missed games Robinson provides year in, year out.

Ultimately, his value isn't going to be that of a clear-cut starting Center in the league given his history. I think a team like Charlotte would throw a high 2nd (#33) for him. It is possible both Minnesota and Boston could offer #31 or #32, depending on what happens with Horford/Porzingis and Gobert/Reid/Randle.

[SARGO127]

The problem with Robinson is similar to Robert Williams III. Both are exceptional per-minute defensive Centers who offer enough offensively where they can play playoff minutes when healthy. The issue is they have some limitations offensively and are often injured with chronic-type injuries.

In the case of Robinson, you need a 1A or 1B Center who can stay healthy, like KAT/Hartenstein were. The advantage of KAT is he can play alongside Mitchell Robinson when Mitch is healthy and then can play full-time center for the extended missed games Robinson provides year in, year out.

Ultimately, his value isn't going to be that of a clear-cut starting Center in the league given his history. I think a team like Charlotte would throw a high 2nd (#33) for him. It is possible both Minnesota and Boston could offer #31 or #32, depending on what happens with Horford/Porzingis and Gobert/Reid/Randle.

I’ve always wanted to pair Robert Williams and Mitch as the C tandem.

[ReggiesKnicks]

The problem with Robinson is similar to Robert Williams III. Both are exceptional per-minute defensive Centers who offer enough offensively where they can play playoff minutes when healthy. The issue is they have some limitations offensively and are often injured with chronic-type injuries.

In the case of Robinson, you need a 1A or 1B Center who can stay healthy, like KAT/Hartenstein were. The advantage of KAT is he can play alongside Mitchell Robinson when Mitch is healthy and then can play full-time center for the extended missed games Robinson provides year in, year out.

Ultimately, his value isn't going to be that of a clear-cut starting Center in the league given his history. I think a team like Charlotte would throw a high 2nd (#33) for him. It is possible both Minnesota and Boston could offer #31 or #32, depending on what happens with Horford/Porzingis and Gobert/Reid/Randle.

I’ve always wanted to pair Robert Williams and Mitch as the C tandem.

That's what 2K is for when you turn off injuries.

Like I said, both need to be paired with a starting caliber center who doesn't miss games.

[Scoot McGroot]

The problem with Robinson is similar to Robert Williams III. Both are exceptional per-minute defensive Centers who offer enough offensively where they can play playoff minutes when healthy. The issue is they have some limitations offensively and are often injured with chronic-type injuries.

In the case of Robinson, you need a 1A or 1B Center who can stay healthy, like KAT/Hartenstein were. The advantage of KAT is he can play alongside Mitchell Robinson when Mitch is healthy and then can play full-time center for the extended missed games Robinson provides year in, year out.

Ultimately, his value isn't going to be that of a clear-cut starting Center in the league given his history. I think a team like Charlotte would throw a high 2nd (#33) for him. It is possible both Minnesota and Boston could offer #31 or #32, depending on what happens with Horford/Porzingis and Gobert/Reid/Randle.

I’ve always wanted to pair Robert Williams and Mitch as the C tandem.

It’d be solid when they’re healthy. I think you’d need a 3rd reliable starting capable center because you’d have a ton of games where one, or even both, are unable to go. Probably need a 4th emergency center, too.

[JayTWill]

I mean trying to say hey he's more available than this really hurt guy isn't the flex you guys think it is. Nor would teams be deciding between the two.

Fine player, but I think we should all understand nobody is likely to give up anything of value for him.

I feel like it just limits the discussion when the entire focus is on the player's injuries. For example you mentioned teams could just pick up one of Lopez, Adams, or Capella instead of Mitch as if any one of them could be easily be available to any team that wants them or if they aren't different players with different skill sets it different stages in their careers that different teams may value differently. It was just injured role-player vs healthy role-player.

I'm a Knicks fan that watched our team go from having 2 starting centers to no quality rotational center for almost the entire off-season. We sat with the taxpayer MLE for a month before all the options dried up and we just threw the remaining money left under the apron at Precious and never used the exception. It may be part of the reason the KAT trade was made. I don't know.

The Knicks gambled on OG's health and the Raptors gambled that a package of players and a pick having more impact down the road. Teams give up value to make gambles. The Lakers attempted to gamble on Williams. The Sixers gambled a ton of money on Embiid and George.

Most of the responses are just that he is injured or he is worth more to the Knicks than another team and I don't even know what that means but I hear it all the time. Healthy Mitch has more value to some teams than others. Injured Mitch has no value to any team including the Knicks.

[Texas Chuck]

[
I feel like it just limits the discussion when the entire focus is on the player's injuries. .

Luckily discussion doesn't seem very limited here at least. More than 50 posts. Do you know how many of my OP's never get 5 responses?

But I don't know how we talk about his trade value while not talking about it? It's relevant. His level of play is relevant. His contract amount and length are relevant. His injury history and current inability to play starter's minutes are also relevant.

Like mentioned above, if you have a center like Towns who can handle big RS minutes and as a bonus can play next to him with Towns shooting, its about as perfect as it gets.

I don't see how he has more value to another team than he does to the Knicks. I'm open to other opinions or suggestions, but that's simply where I land. But my opinion(or the countless others who feel similarly) shouldn't stop anyone else from pursuing this topic. I just don't see how we don't talk about the injury and get anywhere meaningful.


'

[JayTWill]

[
I feel like it just limits the discussion when the entire focus is on the player's injuries. .

Luckily discussion doesn't seem very limited here at least. More than 50 posts. Do you know how many of my OP's never get 5 responses?

But I don't know how we talk about his trade value while not talking about it? It's relevant. His level of play is relevant. His contract amount and length are relevant. His injury history and current inability to play starter's minutes are also relevant.

Like mentioned above, if you have a center like Towns who can handle big RS minutes and as a bonus can play next to him with Towns shooting, its about as perfect as it gets.

I don't see how he has more value to another team than he does to the Knicks. I'm open to other opinions or suggestions, but that's simply where I land. But my opinion(or the countless others who feel similarly) shouldn't stop anyone else from pursuing this topic. I just don't see how we don't talk about the injury and get anywhere meaningful.


'

50 posts about a player's injuries is still a very limited discussion And it's not the only thing that determines a player's trade value.

The Knicks have one of the best centers in the league and they invested a ton of money in him. Has KAT's reputation tanked so hard that the idea of another team might value improving their center rotation more than Knicks unfathomable?

One of the Knicks biggest issues this year was their defense with KAT and Brunson on the court. They were able to find many successful defensive units throughout the year with them separated. In the very limited sample size that we saw pairing Mitch with Brunson and KAT did not fix the defense. Maybe that improves with another year of chemistry. Maybe they are not a good fit together. Who knows.

Mitch has also never played the minutes Gobert has throughout his career so even when healthy playing Mitch and KAT together for significant minutes is going to be difficult unless the Knicks have 3rd quality rotational center. Mitch was a very positive contributor overall but the Knicks have other holes in their roster so yes, I think it is quite possible for another team to value Mitch more than the Knicks. I believe the report was they actually attempted to trade him in the KAT deal before Minnesota insisted on DDV but i'm not sure if that was before or after they knew iHart was leaving.