2022 Off-Season Around the League

[Monster]

Golden State signed Mac McClung to a one-year deal, as expected. Personally, I would have signed him to the same exact deal Josh Minott just received. I think he's worth the roster spot. Another sneaky-good find for the Warriors and I think everyone else missed an opportunity to get a solid young player for cheap.

This is why the Gobert trade can bring value in the future. Why didn't some teams sign McClung? One reason is a lot of teams didn't really have an open player spot. Before the Gobert trade McClung on a 1 year NBA deal pretty much wasn't gonna happen. Heck they may not have even signed Minott to an NBA deal and stuck with him as a 2-way deal. Having an open roster spot to sign a guy like this like you said can get you a good player for cheap.

GS went into the offseason with a bunch of open roster spots. They did lose a couple guys that helped them win the championship but having roster spots allowed them to reload with other players some of them younger. GS won a championship and may have a younger roster this coming season and still he a contender. McClung might the the next GS undrafted guard that contributes to their team when they win a title. It's happened 3 times already. It's a worthwhile signing and I think it's a good move for them adding a guy like him that's a bit more of a PG which I don't think they actually have on their roster aside from Curry. I'm a little surprised that GS was the team that ended up landing him as I agree with you he seemed to be worthy of a roster spot.

[Lipoli390]

Golden State signed Mac McClung to a one-year deal, as expected. Personally, I would have signed him to the same exact deal Josh Minott just received. I think he's worth the roster spot. Another sneaky-good find for the Warriors and I think everyone else missed an opportunity to get a solid young player for cheap.

Well, I predicted he's sign with Golden State. That's why I knew we'd never get him on a two-way. I think McClung is going to be a really good NBA player. If I were in in Connelly's position, I would have offered him our last roster spot on a longer-term deal than the one-year deal he got from the Warriors. That's how high I am on him. My friend who was with us at Summer League was similarly blown away by McClung.

[Lipoli390]

I just saw this report:

Connor Letourneau: To clarify, Mac McClung is a training-camp invite for the Warriors. No guarantees he makes the 15-man roster. Still, McClung should have a chance -- just like Avery Bradley and GPII did a year ago. - via Twitter Con_Chron

So what's the real story? Did he sign a one-year deal with the Warriors or not? I'm a bit confused.

[Monster]

Golden State signed Mac McClung to a one-year deal, as expected. Personally, I would have signed him to the same exact deal Josh Minott just received. I think he's worth the roster spot. Another sneaky-good find for the Warriors and I think everyone else missed an opportunity to get a solid young player for cheap.

Well, I predicted he's sign with Golden State. That's why I knew we'd never get him on a two-way. I think McClung is going to be a really good NBA player. If I were in in Connelly's position, I would have offered him our last roster spot on a longer-term deal than the one-year deal he got from the Warriors. That's how high I am on him. My friend who was with us at Summer League was similarly blown away by McClung.

I just read his 1 year deal with GS is non-guaranteed. It would be interesting to know if McClung would have agreed to a Gupta special for any team. I don't have any insider info but I wonder if McClung is a guy that was willing to bet on himself than lock himself into getting essentially the vet min for 3-4 years. I expect him to make the Warriors team but who knows who they will be able to sign before the season. They still may end up moving on from him. #keepthedreamalive #McClungontohope

[Monster]

I just saw this report:

Connor Letourneau: To clarify, Mac McClung is a training-camp invite for the Warriors. No guarantees he makes the 15-man roster. Still, McClung should have a chance -- just like Avery Bradley and GPII did a year ago. - via Twitter Con_Chron

So what's the real story? Did he sign a one-year deal with the Warriors or not? I'm a bit confused.

I see you saw this about the time I did! It's simply a 1 year deal with no guarantees. Same type of deal RHJ had a few years ago and what a lot of guys sign going into training camp. Sometimes guys get a little something guaranteed but not him. It's also not an exhibit 10 contract so no $50,000 guaranteed (which doesn't count against the cap) and he can't be converted straight to a 2-way deal.

[Camden [enjin:6601484]]

I'm seeing rumors from local Utah Jazz accounts that the Donovan Mitchell trade is done and agreed to, and that the teams involved are in the last steps before it being announced. We should have news very, very soon.

[Camden [enjin:6601484]]

Brace yourselves for the New York Knicks or some mystery team to give up the same or more assets for Donovan Mitchell as what Minnesota gave up for Rudy Gobert and get praised or celebrated for making a significant move that gets them a very, very good player. At the end of the day, acquiring a star is a big deal.

Granted, Mitchell is younger than Gobert, but the latter is arguably better and can positively affect his teammates more than the former. While the Gobert trade will continue to get knocked by those who don't recognize or understand the Timberwolves' vision, I expect the same talking heads to love the Mitchell trade for wherever he winds up next.

[Lipoli390]

"I've been receiving texts as we speak that the Donovan Mitchell trade is done - it's agreed upon. They're working out the final details to be announced here shortly.... It's a haul" - Utah Radio show Jake & Ben Podcast ft @PKKinahan (via @ZoneSportsNet)

[Lipoli390]

Here's what Kendrick Perkins had to say about Donovan Mitchell:

The question came up whether Mitchell is the type of player that a franchise could build around, and the always opinionated Perkins didn't hold back. "It's no disrespect to Donovan Mitchell...But is he a number one option type guy, is he a guy that can take your franchise to the NBA Finals and possibly win a championship? Hell no!"

It's interesting to ponder who around the League is a guy who can take a franchise to the NBA finals and win a championship. There's a short list of best players on the championship teams over the past 10 years: Steph Curry, LeBron James, Kawhi Leonard, Giannis, and Tony Parker or Tim Duncan in 2014. Kevin Durant won a championship, but would he have won it without Steph Curry? Of course, just because a player hasn't been on a championship team doesn't mean he can't take a franchise to the finals and win it all. I think Barkley was good enough to do it, but he ran into Michael Jordan. I'd say Karl Malone was too, but same MJ problem for him.

So who are today's players who can do that but haven't? Jason Tatum with Boston? The Celtics made it to the finals and he is considered their best player. Jimmy Butler in Miami? They came really close to making the NBA finals last season. Joel Embiid in Philly? Luka Doncic in Dallas? Ja Morant in Memphis? Jokic in Denver? How about Edwards in Minnesota? Could KAT be considered?

When it comes to Donovan Mitchell, I'm not sure whether I agree or disagree with Perkins. I know Gobert's not that type of player. But what I do know is that Donovan Mitchell is a guy who can dominate the ball and carry a team offensively. I know he's still only 25 years old and probably hasn't played his best basketball. Kobe didn't have his best season until he was 27. The bottom line for me is closer than Gobert to being that one player (surrounded by other good ones) who can take your team to the NBA finals. Therefore, he should command a bigger haul than the one the Wolves gave up for Gobert. Understand that I'm talking generally. I actually think Gobert is more valuable to the Wolves than Donovan Mitchell would be because we already have Edwards and KAT.

If the Knicks can get Donovan Mitchell for 5 first round picks, without giving up RJ Barrett or Mitchell Robinson, I'd consider that a great deal for the Knicks. They be giving up the same number of picks as the Wolves while retaining their core of Brunson, Barrett and Robinson. And they have plenty of additional picks they acquired from other teams so their draft cupboard won't be bare. On the other hand, would a core of Brunson, Donovan Mitchell, RJ Barrett and Mitchell Robinson be able to compete with the Sixers, Bucks, Celtics and Heat? I'm not so sure. And that takes me back to the comment of Kendrick Perkins. He might be right about this.

[Monster]

Here's what Kendrick Perkins had to say about Donovan Mitchell:

The question came up whether Mitchell is the type of player that a franchise could build around, and the always opinionated Perkins didn't hold back. "It's no disrespect to Donovan Mitchell...But is he a number one option type guy, is he a guy that can take your franchise to the NBA Finals and possibly win a championship? Hell no!"

It's interesting to ponder who around the League is a guy who can take a franchise to the NBA finals and win a championship. There's a short list of best players on the championship teams over the past 10 years: Steph Curry, LeBron James, Kawhi Leonard, Giannis, and Tony Parker or Tim Duncan in 2014. Kevin Durant won a championship, but would he have won it without Steph Curry? Of course, just because a player hasn't been on a championship team doesn't mean he can't take a franchise to the finals and win it all. I think Barkley was good enough to do it, but he ran into Michael Jordan. I'd say Karl Malone was too, but same MJ problem for him.

So who are today's players who can do that but haven't? Jason Tatum with Boston? The Celtics made it to the finals and he is considered their best player. Jimmy Butler in Miami? They came really close to making the NBA finals last season. Joel Embiid in Philly? Luka Doncic in Dallas? Ja Morant in Memphis? Jokic in Denver? How about Edwards in Minnesota? Could KAT be considered?

When it comes to Donovan Mitchell, I'm not sure whether I agree or disagree with Perkins. I know Gobert's not that type of player. But what I do know is that Donovan Mitchell is a guy who can dominate the ball and carry a team offensively. I know he's still only 25 years old and probably hasn't played his best basketball. Kobe didn't have his best season until he was 27. The bottom line for me is closer than Gobert to being that one player (surrounded by other good ones) who can take your team to the NBA finals. Therefore, he should command a bigger haul than the one the Wolves gave up for Gobert. Understand that I'm talking generally. I actually think Gobert is more valuable to the Wolves than Donovan Mitchell would be because we already have Edwards and KAT.

If the Knicks can get Donovan Mitchell for 5 first round picks, without giving up RJ Barrett or Mitchell Robinson, I'd consider that a great deal for the Knicks. They be giving up the same number of picks as the Wolves while retaining their core of Brunson, Barrett and Robinson. And they have plenty of additional picks they acquired from other teams so their draft cupboard won't be bare. On the other hand, would a core of Brunson, Donovan Mitchell, RJ Barrett and Mitchell Robinson be able to compete with the Sixers, Bucks, Celtics and Heat? I'm not so sure. And that takes me back to the comment of Kendrick Perkins. He might be right about this.

I agree with Perkins. That doesn't mean the Knicks shouldn't trade for Mitchell though.