The Cleveland Cavaliers have acquired Donovan Mitchell in a trade, sources tell ESPN.

ISO

Pass me the rock nikka
Joined
Mar 12, 2013
Messages
62,443
Reputation
8,811
Daps
198,601
Reppin
BX, NYC
Dude was incredible tonight...

38 points and 12 dimes, dude is a walking highlight reel nasty dunk off the spin, deep threes, monstrous blocks at some point he is going to have to get his true props and the clowns in here gonna have to put some respect on his name. This guy is a bazooka on offense.

He played so calm and collected and in control the whole way. He completely decimated us tonight with his P&R reads and drive and kick the reason Dean Wade and Kevin Love had all them threes.
 

Osmosis

Superstar
Joined
Mar 13, 2014
Messages
21,118
Reputation
3,177
Daps
57,069
The way people talked about Mitchell never made sense. The defense/size concerns are real but he's one of the best offensive players in the league and has proven to drive efficient offense. Players that can create quality looks as easily and frequently as he does do not grow on trees. You acquire a player like him every time and try to scheme around his deficiencies. You don't hear people talk about Ja's defense but every discussion about Mitchell is centered on what he can't do instead of what he does do.
 

Arris

Superstar
Joined
Sep 11, 2013
Messages
8,968
Reputation
2,764
Daps
33,232
Reppin
Cleveland
Everybody was talking about the cost was too high, well ask the Cavs how much it'd cost to get him now smh.
I feel like for the knicks it truly was. Not necessarily for the players they would have given up, but the future picks and flexibility.

they didn't have enough from the draft/free agency to take the hit and be a great team with mitchell anytime soon. it's his home area so he definitely would have re-signed, but they would likely be entering a title contention window on a new contract and that's if they were operating on a high/lucky level as a front office putting pieces around him 2-4 years down the line.

they were in between a rock and a hard place and the only reason why I say it was bad to not do the trade is that they gave randle that contract really handicapping them from making drastic improvements roster wise.

the cavs gave up multiple firsts with stipulations and lauri/sexton who are more proven talent than what the knicks had and they still had depth and talent to spare. garland has played one half of basketball and even without him the cavs so far (small sample size) look like the second best team in the east. knicks giving up what ainge wanted probably makes them a 5-6 seed this year max and downhill from there until they can retool 2-3 years later with mitchell
 

Organic Trees

Go Cavs! #LetEmKnow
Joined
Jan 1, 2015
Messages
5,613
Reputation
334
Daps
15,075
Reppin
Cleveland born & raised
Man I’m just so happy to see he brought into our system man. On the defense end this year he’s killing it. Playing great on the ball and off the ball defense. Making hustle plays and sacrificing his body. He’s playing with that grittiness man. Best trade for us since Kevin love that was 9 years ago.
Once Garland return he won’t have to do everything on his own. Rubio almost ready. But back to Mitchell. This nikka is a bonafide leader. Bickerstaff is underrated as a head coach too
 

Organic Trees

Go Cavs! #LetEmKnow
Joined
Jan 1, 2015
Messages
5,613
Reputation
334
Daps
15,075
Reppin
Cleveland born & raised
I feel like for the knicks it truly was. Not necessarily for the players they would have given up, but the future picks and flexibility.

they didn't have enough from the draft/free agency to take the hit and be a great team with mitchell anytime soon. it's his home area so he definitely would have re-signed, but they would likely be entering a title contention window on a new contract and that's if they were operating on a high/lucky level as a front office putting pieces around him 2-4 years down the line.

they were in between a rock and a hard place and the only reason why I say it was bad to not do the trade is that they gave randle that contract really handicapping them from making drastic improvements roster wise.

the cavs gave up multiple firsts with stipulations and lauri/sexton who are more proven talent than what the knicks had and they still had depth and talent to spare. garland has played one half of basketball and even without him the cavs so far (small sample size) look like the second best team in the east. knicks giving up what ainge wanted probably makes them a 5-6 seed this year max and downhill from there until they can retool 2-3 years later with mitchell
Knicks have a really good team with Brunson. The rotations are head scratching
 

Arris

Superstar
Joined
Sep 11, 2013
Messages
8,968
Reputation
2,764
Daps
33,232
Reppin
Cleveland
Knicks have a really good team with Brunson. The rotations are head scratching
I feel like "really good" is a stretch respectfully. they'll be competitive for years to come with what they have, but they are nothing more than a second round exit at most.

with Mitchell they probably look similar through 2-3 years but have a lot more upside after that theoretically
 

King Poetic

The D.O.G.( Disciple of God)
Supporter
Joined
Feb 15, 2013
Messages
102,507
Reputation
21,207
Daps
499,649
Reppin
North Pacific Ocean
U have Mobley and Allen in the paint. Them 2 alone getting 30 rebounds together

Mitchell and Garland can kill u off the dribble and dished it out to quality shooters

Kolby Altman and mike gansey the cavs front office did a hell of a job getting the right players
 
Top