When should the Pistons make their Donovan Mitchell type trade.

[FloridaMan78]

I’m bored. Here’s a poll. Keep in mind what Cleveland gave up.

[tmorgan]

If the exact right type of player becomes available, next off-season. Thing is, I’m not even sure that’s possible.

What I’d be looking for is a better Denver Jerami Grant. All-Defense (or close), high efficiency (but not necessarily high volume) scorer, slated to start at the three. Can finish. Makes open threes. Doesn’t need to create for himself, necessarily. Not a type that freaks out about shots, because he’d likely be getting less than Bey does now if Cade and Ivey develop properly.

My offer for said mythical player (who should definitely be 28 or younger) is Bey and a couple of top 5 protected firsts, plus whatever salary ballast is needed. Cade, Ivey, Stewart and Duren are not part of the deal — those are my other starters long term. Would prefer to keep Livers as well. But others can be the filler if they hold any value to the receiving team.

I wouldn’t make that big of an offer for Herb Jones now, but if he develops right (and not too well to make him too expensive), that’s one possibility. There are probably others I’m not thinking of, but I’m sure the list of qualified targets is pretty short, considering my exact wants.

[Mr Peanut]

Our first round pick protections will stop us from making that sort of trade for at least a couple of seasons. But I think we're at least two seasons from making that kind of trade anyway.

[The Number 9]

There is no rush until we at least compete in a play in. Unless an opportunity comes up of course.
I think it will be, at best, during the 2023/2024 season, most probably just after that one.

And it will probably not be a Donovan Mitchell type trade (for an AS or barely all star player). We have those already.

[zeebneeb]

This is impossible to know right now, which means the time is not right.

After this season, or if the team is lucky, during this season, they, and the fans will see what the team is lacking. Then, and only then do you make a move.

I equate this with the Rasheed trade. That Pistons team was good, damn good before landing Rasheed, but everyone knew there was just something missing.

When you hit that point, that's when you make a move you over the top. With all of that said, it could be two, or even three seasons before the team is even ready to make a move. I believe it will be sooner, as the talent the team has now is stacking up, but unless we have turned into the Knicks, now is not the time.*










*Unless we are talking about acquiring Herb Jones. I would ship this seasons pick, unprotected and Stewart, and whatever else to land him.(or keep Stewart, and ship Bey instead)

Cade
Ivey
Bey
Jones
Duren

Jones defensive potential is absolutely the highest I've seen since Rodman, and he can shoot the damn ball as well.

[bstein14]

I think you make that push when you see a young core that hits a wall or takes a step back in the playoffs. If you keep getting further each year that could be a good reason to continue to see the team grow organically.

Boston drafted there guys and was patient with them and saw them reach the finals this year.

Memphis drafted their guys and has been patient with the core as they've gotten better and better.

I think you want to be pretty good before you make that Sheed like final piece trade. For us I think that likely means 2025 or 2026. Of course the Cavs didn't wait at all. They made the push early in the rebuild for Mitchell and that could pay dividends for them, but it also could mean between Mitchell and Garland that there will be less development/touches for Mobley in their offense in the short term which could lower his overall ceiling a bit as a player. He's not likely to be getting those crunch time looks now like he might have been pre-Mitchell trade.

On the flip side, if this core didn't get where we wanted/needed it to by the time Cade is up for a max extension, he may want another all-star piece brought in before he re-ups with us so that could also push us up a big.

[Manocad]

This year - No. The Pistons have too many unknowns in their young players so this season is too soon. I know some people here like to project a young player's current performance to be all they'll ever be and thus cry "We need X star player NOW NOW NOW! Give up anything to get him!" but that's an inaccurate projection.

After a 10 game improvement - No. See above. Still too soon.

After we make the play-in - Not IMO. The team could still be growing/improving. A year after making the play-in the team could look like an ECF contender without changing anything.

After we make the playoffs - See above.

After we win a playoff series - See above.

They shouldn't ever need to - No. That's completely unrealistic in today's NBA.

When the right player becomes available - Yep. IMO this covers not only need but timing as well. Would the team be better adding a superstar right now who addresses the biggest team need? Sure. Does that make him the "right player" in both the need and timing sense? No.

The key thing to consider is that there doesn't have to be an answer right now for how to address what may or may not happen this season and certainly not next season or beyond. Obviously having a plan in place (e.g. "build through the draft, fill gaps in free agency/with trades") is a must, but the who and when each year can only be reactionary.

[mattao313]

Probably when we get 2 Allstar level players

Sent from my SM-A528B using RealGM mobile app

[whitehops]

we're very limited from making a "donovan mitchell trade" anytime soon. we can't trade any future picks until the pick we traded in the isaiah stewart trade conveys. realistically the soonest that conveys is the 2025 draft so that off season would be the soonest we would have serious draft capital to trade.

also, to match salary with a player who makes ~$30M (like mitchell) we'd only have bagley, olynyk, noel and burks to trade so the other team would definitely want to get as much draft capital as they could in return.

so after the 2025 draft is the soonest we realistically could make a big trade. bey, livers and stewart will presumably have been given extensions (more salary to match contracts), ivey, and duren will still be under contract and if they develop well could be attractive assets plus we'd have all of our first round picks to offer in trades.

that's three off seasons from now. unless we become a top 12 team in the next two seasons we're gonna have to leverage our cap space to acquire assets; whether that be talent in free agency, taking on bad contracts and picks or taking on middling contracts that just want to free up cap space (like how we got burks).

[Laimbeer]

When we're good enough for our pick to convey. We'll have the draft capital and it might make sense.

[vege]

Probably when we get 2 Allstar level players

Sent from my SM-A528B using RealGM mobile app

This. Cleveland had 3, what they did was correct even if it doesn't work for them. They didn't give up anything to acquire Mitchell anyways, those picks should all be in the 20's.

[theBigLip]

I voted that we shouldn’t need to. I guess if a great deal comes along, but I just don’t like this approach. We will have the cap space to get who we need. I’d rather go that route than to give up FRPs for a decade. Some of these trades are just getting insane.

[Billl]

Unless someone besides cade and ivey just shows out, we're still going to need another all-star level player. Whether we get that in a trade or FA, who cares.

Mitchell is a legit #1 scoring option on a playoff team though. I'm not sure we'll need to gather enough assets for that level. Assuming Cade progress, we're looking for a #2 or #3 depending on how Ivey does.

[Invictus88]

I'm just not a fan of Mitchell in terms of his current body of work / skillset. If the guy never learns to play defense then I just don't see a team he is on finally winning a title. Of course he can change his approach at some later date but it's not known at this point that he ever will. He definitely didn't when he was in Utah.

I do see there is a poll option "When the right player becomes available" but what does that even mean? I'd say we should always make a trade when "the right player becomes available" because that implies A) he fits our team needs and B) can be had for a cost that fits what we are currently trying to do as a franchise (which could be rebuilding, win-now, etc).

Maybe the OP is trying to ask "When should the Pistons make a big win-now trade?". In that case I'd have an answer that would depend on previously demonstrated success and projected upwards mobility of players on our current roster (i.e. Do I think we can win a championship if I need to sacrifice / stop rebuilding to get player X?).

But my answer to the question in it's current form is "Never".

[oldncreaky]

If you look at when this approach has worked in the past -- Jrue to MIL, Kawhi to TOR, Pau to LAL, KG to BOS, Sheed to DET -- the "one final piece" is landing on a very good team. In fact, 3 of those 5 (MIL, TOR and DET) had all been frustrated in the playoffs in prior years and had been knocking on the door for at least a year.

Don't go all in with a band hand -- it's just making a bonfire of assets.

[FloridaMan78]

I'm just not a fan of Mitchell in terms of his current body of work / skillset. If the guy never learns to play defense then I just don't see a team he is on finally winning a title. Of course he can change his approach at some later date but it's not known at this point that he ever will. He definitely didn't when he was in Utah.

I do see there is a poll option "When the right player becomes available" but what does that even mean? I'd say we should always make a trade when "the right player becomes available" because that implies A) he fits our team needs and B) can be had for a cost that fits what we are currently trying to do as a franchise (which could be rebuilding, win-now, etc).

Maybe the OP is trying to ask "When should the Pistons make a big win-now trade?". In that case I'd have an answer that would depend on previously demonstrated success and projected upwards mobility of players on our current roster (i.e. Do I think we can win a championship if I need to sacrifice / stop rebuilding to get player X?).

But my answer to the question in it's current form is "Never".

The "when the right player becomes available" pretty much sidesteps the time table question and makes it more about fit like you said. But like you said the cost would be a huge variable.

The post is a bit of a "where are we in the rebuild" type question.

It's interesting to see where most people see us. I'd been seeing people online saying we need to do what Cleveland did soon and I couldn't disagree more.

Although I disagree with never, I don't think we should make this kind of trade until we're at the very least in the playoffs, even if it's the right fit. I think it's too much of a risk to mortgage our future.

[vege]

I voted that we shouldn’t need to. I guess if a great deal comes along, but I just don’t like this approach. We will have the cap space to get who we need. I’d rather go that route than to give up FRPs for a decade. Some of these trades are just getting insane.

When we ever signed a desirable FA with our cap space? We need to either trade or draft all stars. Late 1sts are almost useless. Once your team is a deep playoffs team you should be trading those imo.

[Uncle Mxy]

I'd simply await the reincarnation of Trader Jack... no biggie.

[oldncreaky]

I'd simply await the reincarnation of Trader Jack... no biggie.

LOL

McCloskey had the reputation as Trader Jack, but his trades are a small part of what created the Bad Boys. A bunch of his trades were questionable, particularly as he tried to build around Zeke. Trading Livingstone and Carr for a washed up Dan Roundfield set us back a bit. Giving away Ricky Pierce was annoying. All those attempts to get veteran forwards for picks: Greenwood, Nimphius, Dawkins, etc.

Ironically, what really worked is getting lucky/good in the draft. Getting 2 HOFers (Dumars, Rodman) and a solid rotation big (Salley) in successive drafts is what made Detroit a contender. Kudos to Jack for going against the grain and getting an under-the-radar Joe D when 3 of his best 5 players were guards, but I do wonder if Detroit would have been better in the early and mid 80s (and had a longer window) if Jack hadn't been so generous punting away draft picks.

Dumars, on the other hand, as a GM built a contender through trades and FA (Tayshaun was the only starter who was drafted), and then destroyed it the same way (Iverson, CV, Ben Gordon, Josh Smith . . . arrgh). Still don't understand what happened to Joe's eye.

So I'm pretty good with Weaver. He's showing patience and a consistent approach. He seems to have a weird fetish about signing and overpaying for mediocre bigs like Plumlee, Olynyk and Bagley but that's nitpicking.

[FloridaMan78]

Similar hypothetical

Suns implode. Ayton gets traded at deadline Chris Paul steeply declines. Suns barely make playoffs and lose first round. Suns rebuild and Booker wants out.

Ivey plays well. Cade makes a big jump. Stewart, Bey, livers, Duren all improve. We make play in. Our pick next year goes to OKC.

Would you trade Ivey and multiple firsts for Booker?