Mitchell Robinson - Rim runners and the playoffs.

[NoDopeOnSundays]

Gobert's biggest problem is that he's a lumbering big man with limited agility. Despite his accolades he's always had a glaring weakness as a defender and it's easy to exploit it with the right matchup. Steven Adams is similar, though a bit more agile. Drummond is just a terrible all-around defender.

While Gobert is a x2 DPOY, Mitch has the makings to be a better defender in today's game in terms of style, not necessarily accolades or even impact. It's the same issue I always brought up with KP, especially during his time here when he was adamant about only playing the 4. He was never agile enough to guard stretch fours.

Not that I watch an enormous amount of Jazz games but I don't ever recall seeing Gobert sequences where he makes 2-3 plays out on the perimeter in a single possession: running a shooter off the line, recovering/rotating to make another play or two. He doesn't fly all over the court like Mitch can. Mitch should be more switchable, granted most teams use drop coverage for their big in today's PnR.

For the record, I do agree that Mitch's ceiling is a high-end role player because that's what shot-blocking/run-running big men are.

It's not about the defense as much as it is the offense, the problem with Gobert in the series with the Jazz is that his vaunted defense has been neutralized cause Jokic has turned into a stretch big. That is how the Warriors were able to win titles, you pull the opposing center out of the lane so that your guards get a free shot at the lane since there's no more rim protection. It's why teams are starting to move towards multiple wings, unless you have an offensively gifted big that can kill the switch with their own offense (Davis, KAT, Jokic, Embiid). Gobert cannot score at a high level, and if they get by the Nuggets he'll have the Clippers waiting in the next round with cheap centers, and wings who will make his lack of offense even more pronounced because of how much ground they cover on defense.

The question isn't about whether Mitch will be able to switch on defense, it's whether or not he'll be able to space the floor on the other end or punish switches when he's on offense. So far, very few bigs can punish the switch, and I don't think he can do it in the future either, there's maybe 6 guys who can do it in the league. If he can't punish the switch he needs to be able to space the floor, there is no more room in the league for a rim runner who is getting paid a large portion of the cap.

If we could somehow lock Mitch into a deal for $10-12 million a year then sure I have no objections, but the league wide value of rim runners has plummeted in the last 3 years, look at what Capela & Drummond were traded for. When Mitch starts he will post numbers and will want a max. You can see this coming a mile away, it's happened with pretty much every good rim runner of the last 15 years.

[Context]

It's sad to say but if the spurs had mitch as a rookie...we wouldnt be debating about him...the one thing about D.Jordan
that he proved to me when he was here- is that Mitch needs the right influence to develop...

Mitch is a big kid- didnt get that traditional experience that many prospects get...

[Jalen Bluntson]

Wow. Mitch is young and raw and already a good player. People are worried about him? He has improved his game since being drafted last season. What more do you want?

He needs to let it fly!!! Then we will know more.

[NoDopeOnSundays]

Wow. Mitch is young and raw and already a good player. People are worried about him? He has improved his game since being drafted last season. What more do you want?

He needs to let it fly!!! Then we will know more.

I'm worried that his production leads to him getting the type of contract Capela, Adams, Jordan, Drummond and Gobert got.


I remember everyone saying how much of a deal the Rockets got on Capela, in reality they overpaid for him because you're better off with a vet making a fraction of that to do the same things.

[Capn'O]

IB4Shammgod

i didn't even read the initial post past the 1st sentence. i'm making a list. i'm checking it twice. i'm gonna find out who's nuts i'm gonna put in a vice. that's right. santa sham is gonna sh*t down your chimney when christmas comes and mitch has taken the next step on offense. i'm coming for all you motherf*ckers. ho ho ho bitches.

WOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!

LET. IT. FLY. MITCH.

[Capn'O]

Unfortunately, the road through the playoffs is littered with guys like Jokic, Embiid, Gasol, Ibaka, AD, Porzingis, etc. Rudy Gobert would have been exposed eventually. I understand the questions surrounding Mitch, and whether he is a 'meta' player since the league is currently trending towards 5-out small ball. Dont get it twisted - Centers in the league are still important. Rim running is a basic skill that is required to be successful. You need a Javale Mcgee to be above the rim and making plays and I think that Mitch is at that level already.

The question is, can he develop into a threat from 3 so that he doesn't clog the lane? Can he develop an efficient post game? Does he have passing vision to play above the key? Right now he's playing about 20mpg. That's terrific value for a second rounder, but to become a championship caliber center, the Knicks need him to be able to do more.

If all he does is reduce his foul rate, sure he'll play 35mpg, maybe even put up some stats, but he'll eventually just be exposed in the playoffs. Just like Gobert.

I think he has the tools for a jumper but not a proper back to the basket post game. From what I've seen of practice and pre-NBA clips, if his offense really branches it will be more as a face up player. Like a big wing when he's not rim running. Mitch might be a budding unicorn

[Capn'O]

To be fair, the Jazz would have lost this series by now without Gobert. He is putting up 16.5/10rpg in almost 39mpg and is +20 overall. This is not a series where Gobert not being able to shoot is a negative because Jokic really can't protect the paint anyway. So whether they clear Jokic out or not hasn't really mattered. They are just pretty much going after Jokic when he us under the rim and nobody is missing from 3.

I do agree with the general point though. A C that can shoot 3's is definetly a weapon. Jazz are still pretty much putting up 120ppg and both teams are scoring at will. The 3 point shooting and Guard play in that series is just crazy. These dudes arent missing and not sure it has much to do with Gobert/Jokic.

If anything, not even worried about C. Mitch is fine for now and might as well see if he can develop more of an overall game. We gotta find better guards/wings. Our problem is not so much that our C can't shoot as it is that nobody else can shoot

Generally, yes. But moreso than "everyone," a bigger problem is that RJ can't shoot yet. Those are our best pieces and if they are to both stay at least one of them needs to be more of a threat from the outside.

[Context]

IB4Shammgod

i didn't even read the initial post past the 1st sentence. i'm making a list. i'm checking it twice. i'm gonna find out who's nuts i'm gonna put in a vice. that's right. santa sham is gonna sh*t down your chimney when christmas comes and mitch has taken the next step on offense. i'm coming for all you motherf*ckers. ho ho ho bitches.

I missed this

[Deeeez Knicks]

To be fair, the Jazz would have lost this series by now without Gobert. He is putting up 16.5/10rpg in almost 39mpg and is +20 overall. This is not a series where Gobert not being able to shoot is a negative because Jokic really can't protect the paint anyway. So whether they clear Jokic out or not hasn't really mattered. They are just pretty much going after Jokic when he us under the rim and nobody is missing from 3.

I do agree with the general point though. A C that can shoot 3's is definetly a weapon. Jazz are still pretty much putting up 120ppg and both teams are scoring at will. The 3 point shooting and Guard play in that series is just crazy. These dudes arent missing and not sure it has much to do with Gobert/Jokic.

If anything, not even worried about C. Mitch is fine for now and might as well see if he can develop more of an overall game. We gotta find better guards/wings. Our problem is not so much that our C can't shoot as it is that nobody else can shoot

Generally, yes. But moreso than "everyone," a bigger problem is that RJ can't shoot yet. Those are our best pieces and if they are to both stay at least one of them needs to be more of a threat from the outside.

Yea, I have some optimism for RJ that he can improve enough. Even Mitchell isnt really a great shooter from 3, but takes enough volume and is great scoring everywhere else. Not that RJ will be as good as Mitchell, but just has to improve enough to be respectable and need other guys that teams don't want to leave open.

Almost the same for Mitch. If he can just be somewhat of a threat it can help keep teams a little more honest.

[blueNorange]

If Wiseman somehow drops to us, you take him, and trade Mitch play them together, and make wiseman hustle on defense.

ya i don't get why trade mitch if they get wiseman.

wiseman has a jumper so he won't be clogging the paint ala randle.

[NoDopeOnSundays]

To be fair, the Jazz would have lost this series by now without Gobert. He is putting up 16.5/10rpg in almost 39mpg and is +20 overall. This is not a series where Gobert not being able to shoot is a negative because Jokic really can't protect the paint anyway. So whether they clear Jokic out or not hasn't really mattered. They are just pretty much going after Jokic when he us under the rim and nobody is missing from 3.

I do agree with the general point though. A C that can shoot 3's is definetly a weapon. Jazz are still pretty much putting up 120ppg and both teams are scoring at will. The 3 point shooting and Guard play in that series is just crazy. These dudes arent missing and not sure it has much to do with Gobert/Jokic.

If anything, not even worried about C. Mitch is fine for now and might as well see if he can develop more of an overall game. We gotta find better guards/wings. Our problem is not so much that our C can't shoot as it is that nobody else can shoot

Generally, yes. But moreso than "everyone," a bigger problem is that RJ can't shoot yet. Those are our best pieces and if they are to both stay at least one of them needs to be more of a threat from the outside.

Trading RJ isn't on the table at all, I have no reservations about him at all and I think we'll see a progression on his shot similar to Brandon Ingram, their shooting stats as rookies are almost identical.

[NoDopeOnSundays]

If Wiseman somehow drops to us, you take him, and trade Mitch play them together, and make wiseman hustle on defense.

ya i don't get why trade mitch if they get wiseman.

wiseman has a jumper so he won't be clogging the paint ala randle.

Because it makes more sense to have a big wing play the 4 if you have an offensive center.

Look at how awful the Sixers looked when you play two centers together.

[blueNorange]

ya i don't get why trade mitch if they get wiseman.

wiseman has a jumper so he won't be clogging the paint ala randle.

Because it makes more sense to have a big wing play the 4 if you have an offensive center.

Look at how awful the Sixers looked when you play two centers together.

you need to stop comparing players because you're terrible at it.

embiid is 280 and slow, mitch is 220 and shifty
horford is 240 and not athletic anymore, wiseman i'm sure is.

[NoDopeOnSundays]

ya i don't get why trade mitch if they get wiseman.

wiseman has a jumper so he won't be clogging the paint ala randle.

Because it makes more sense to have a big wing play the 4 if you have an offensive center.

Look at how awful the Sixers looked when you play two centers together.

you need to stop comparing players because you're terrible at it.

embiid is 280 and slow, mitch is 220 and shifty
horford is 240 and not athletic anymore, wiseman i'm sure is.

What are you even talking about here? The Sixers problems were on offense, their spacing was terrible even though both of their big guys shoot the three because neither is respectable enough to worry about taking a volume. Yet, you want to put two guys together that neither shoots threes yet, because one is "shifty" and the other takes mid-range shots? Did you not just miss the entire season with Randle at the 4 and how awful our spacing was, even though even Randle is a better 3 point shooter than Mitch or Wiseman.

[Capn'O]

Generally, yes. But moreso than "everyone," a bigger problem is that RJ can't shoot yet. Those are our best pieces and if they are to both stay at least one of them needs to be more of a threat from the outside.

Trading RJ isn't on the table at all, I have no reservations about him at all and I think we'll see a progression on his shot similar to Brandon Ingram, their shooting stats as rookies are almost identical.

I'm talking more of a two year horizon. I wouldn't have either on the table now.

[Clyde_Style]

IB4Shammgod

i didn't even read the initial post past the 1st sentence. i'm making a list. i'm checking it twice. i'm gonna find out who's nuts i'm gonna put in a vice. that's right. santa sham is gonna sh*t down your chimney when christmas comes and mitch has taken the next step on offense. i'm coming for all you motherf*ckers. ho ho ho bitches.

I missed this

And you also missed that I'm giving all of these bitchy housewives Frank dolls for Christmas

[Context]

i didn't even read the initial post past the 1st sentence. i'm making a list. i'm checking it twice. i'm gonna find out who's nuts i'm gonna put in a vice. that's right. santa sham is gonna sh*t down your chimney when christmas comes and mitch has taken the next step on offense. i'm coming for all you motherf*ckers. ho ho ho bitches.

I missed this

And you also missed that I'm giving all of these bitchy housewives Frank dolls for Christmas

[Deeeez Knicks]

Gobert's biggest problem is that he's a lumbering big man with limited agility. Despite his accolades he's always had a glaring weakness as a defender and it's easy to exploit it with the right matchup. Steven Adams is similar, though a bit more agile. Drummond is just a terrible all-around defender.

While Gobert is a x2 DPOY, Mitch has the makings to be a better defender in today's game in terms of style, not necessarily accolades or even impact. It's the same issue I always brought up with KP, especially during his time here when he was adamant about only playing the 4. He was never agile enough to guard stretch fours.

Not that I watch an enormous amount of Jazz games but I don't ever recall seeing Gobert sequences where he makes 2-3 plays out on the perimeter in a single possession: running a shooter off the line, recovering/rotating to make another play or two. He doesn't fly all over the court like Mitch can. Mitch should be more switchable, granted most teams use drop coverage for their big in today's PnR.

For the record, I do agree that Mitch's ceiling is a high-end role player because that's what shot-blocking/run-running big men are.

It's not about the defense as much as it is the offense, the problem with Gobert in the series with the Jazz is that his vaunted defense has been neutralized cause Jokic has turned into a stretch big. That is how the Warriors were able to win titles, you pull the opposing center out of the lane so that your guards get a free shot at the lane since there's no more rim protection. It's why teams are starting to move towards multiple wings, unless you have an offensively gifted big that can kill the switch with their own offense (Davis, KAT, Jokic, Embiid). Gobert cannot score at a high level, and if they get by the Nuggets he'll have the Clippers waiting in the next round with cheap centers, and wings who will make his lack of offense even more pronounced because of how much ground they cover on defense.

The question isn't about whether Mitch will be able to switch on defense, it's whether or not he'll be able to space the floor on the other end or punish switches when he's on offense. So far, very few bigs can punish the switch, and I don't think he can do it in the future either, there's maybe 6 guys who can do it in the league. If he can't punish the switch he needs to be able to space the floor, there is no more room in the league for a rim runner who is getting paid a large portion of the cap.

If we could somehow lock Mitch into a deal for $10-12 million a year then sure I have no objections, but the league wide value of rim runners has plummeted in the last 3 years, look at what Capela & Drummond were traded for. When Mitch starts he will post numbers and will want a max. You can see this coming a mile away, it's happened with pretty much every good rim runner of the last 15 years.

Is offensive spacing even a problem for Utah in this series? Mitchell is be able to get to the rim and score at will and they are hitting a ton of 3's. If anything, Mitchell needs another guy who can help take that scoring load and they have to figure out how to stop Murray.

I see the point, but think it gets a little overblown. Seems like Jokic not being able to protect the paint is as big of a liability if not more then Gobert not being able to shoot 3's. Its been kinda neutral on that end.

[RHODEY]

He's 22 now, at 22 Andre Drummond made the all-star team and averaged 17.7ppg, 16.2rpg, 1.5pg and 1.6spg. That got Andre a max contract that summer, which crippled his team.

why are you comparing drummond's 4th season in the nba to robinson's 2nd year in the nba?

Because Drummond was 22, Mitch is going into next season at 22, if you want to compare seasons at 20-21 we can, but then we run into the issue that Drummond was already a fulltime starter his 2nd year in the league.

2 completely different players...

How though? They play a similar game, Drummond lives off the pick and roll & putbacks, their numbers from the same ages are very similar right down to the how many of their shots are assisted.

First you are comparing Mitch to Gobert and now to Drummond....to prove what? As I said earlier we don't really don't know all of what Mitch can become, but he's done great given his specific set of challenges. Dude has less BBall experience than all of them doing what he does.

[NoDopeOnSundays]

Gobert's biggest problem is that he's a lumbering big man with limited agility. Despite his accolades he's always had a glaring weakness as a defender and it's easy to exploit it with the right matchup. Steven Adams is similar, though a bit more agile. Drummond is just a terrible all-around defender.

While Gobert is a x2 DPOY, Mitch has the makings to be a better defender in today's game in terms of style, not necessarily accolades or even impact. It's the same issue I always brought up with KP, especially during his time here when he was adamant about only playing the 4. He was never agile enough to guard stretch fours.

Not that I watch an enormous amount of Jazz games but I don't ever recall seeing Gobert sequences where he makes 2-3 plays out on the perimeter in a single possession: running a shooter off the line, recovering/rotating to make another play or two. He doesn't fly all over the court like Mitch can. Mitch should be more switchable, granted most teams use drop coverage for their big in today's PnR.

For the record, I do agree that Mitch's ceiling is a high-end role player because that's what shot-blocking/run-running big men are.

It's not about the defense as much as it is the offense, the problem with Gobert in the series with the Jazz is that his vaunted defense has been neutralized cause Jokic has turned into a stretch big. That is how the Warriors were able to win titles, you pull the opposing center out of the lane so that your guards get a free shot at the lane since there's no more rim protection. It's why teams are starting to move towards multiple wings, unless you have an offensively gifted big that can kill the switch with their own offense (Davis, KAT, Jokic, Embiid). Gobert cannot score at a high level, and if they get by the Nuggets he'll have the Clippers waiting in the next round with cheap centers, and wings who will make his lack of offense even more pronounced because of how much ground they cover on defense.

The question isn't about whether Mitch will be able to switch on defense, it's whether or not he'll be able to space the floor on the other end or punish switches when he's on offense. So far, very few bigs can punish the switch, and I don't think he can do it in the future either, there's maybe 6 guys who can do it in the league. If he can't punish the switch he needs to be able to space the floor, there is no more room in the league for a rim runner who is getting paid a large portion of the cap.

If we could somehow lock Mitch into a deal for $10-12 million a year then sure I have no objections, but the league wide value of rim runners has plummeted in the last 3 years, look at what Capela & Drummond were traded for. When Mitch starts he will post numbers and will want a max. You can see this coming a mile away, it's happened with pretty much every good rim runner of the last 15 years.

Is offensive spacing even a problem for Utah in this series? Mitchell is be able to get to the rim and score at will and they are hitting a ton of 3's. If anything, Mitchell needs another guy who can help take that scoring load and they have to figure out how to stop Murray.

I see the point, but think it gets a little overblown. Seems like Jokic not being able to protect the paint is as big of a liability if not more then Gobert not being able to shoot 3's. Its been kinda neutral on that end.

The Nuggets aren't a good defensive team, the presumption with the Jazz is that because you have a good defensive center your defense should be good. If he's not giving you great defense and he's pulled away from the rim what does he really give you? Jokic's defense is horrible, but the passing and shooting are such a big threat that he's still making a big impact on the game.

This is not exclusive to Gobert, he's just the main example because he's the last of the maxed salary defensive rim rollers. I don't think it's overblown at all, the Rockets had more than enough shooting with Capela, still got rid of him. We can all see the trend, the only arguments for Mitch in here are the hope that he can develop into a better shooter, nobody has told me how he's so different from all of the previous $20+ million rim rollers that teams eventually get rid of.