Who is better, Jaylen Brown or Donovan Mitchell?

[Celtics2021]

Wait a couple of months and Brogdon can be the outgoing centerpiece of a deal for Mitchell.

Brogdon, Pritchard, and every pick we’re allowed to trade.  Probably isn’t enough I’d guess, but we’d have a real big three with a terrific supporting cast.

[gouki88]

Wait a couple of months and Brogdon can be the outgoing centerpiece of a deal for Mitchell.

Brogdon, Pritchard, and every pick we’re allowed to trade.  Probably isn’t enough I’d guess, but we’d have a real big three with a terrific supporting cast.

Smart-Mitchell-Brown-Tatum would be nasty. Not sure if Utah bites, but nasty nonetheless

[Moranis]

If you could get Mitchell without Tatum or Brown, I think you'd have to do it, though the cost would be immense.  If Utah would do something like this, I think you have to do it.

Smart, Rob, Grant, Pritchard, 25 1st, 27 1st, 29 1st

for

Mitchell

I just don't know if that is enough because there is no clear star going back to Utah and that seems like the type of trade that needs a potential star going to Utah.

Post Trade even more roster holes

Starters - Brogdon, Mitchell, Brown, Tatum, Horford
Rotation - White, Gallo

But if you did the trade in the next few days you could then use the TPE either with Utah (Clarkson?) or other teams

Ainge is blowing Utah up. He won't be looking for talent and contracts. He will be looking for high first round picks, as little long term salary as possible, salary dumping, if possible, and high end talent on rookie contracts.

Ainge obviously likes Smart and Rob, but they both do have value.  He could likely move them and collect at least a couple more 1st rounders if he wanted, but I also think he might keep them as they aren't going to move the needle a bunch on the wins and losses, but could create a nice lockerroom environment for a young team.  Grant and PP are both still on rookie deals.  Not star potential, but both look like solid rotational pieces and you need those kind of players on a team.  3 unprotected 1st's down the line. 

If Boston needed to add teams to send Smart to, for assets immediately, I think that could happen.  I mean would Cleveland want Smart and send Sexton to Utah.  Sexton is basically Mitchell lite and Smart would be a great compliment to Garland, Mobley, and Allen.   So something like that would make sense. 

Trade 1 - Beasley to Boston into TPE for multiple 2nd round picks

Trade 2
Boston - Mitchell, Gay
Cleveland - Smart
Utah - Sexton, Rob, Grant, PP, 1st's (25, 27, 29)

Utah clears out a bunch of salary so they can acquire Sexton via sign and trade.  They get a #1 young scorer locked up long term.  A solid great value young center locked up for several years, a couple of rookie contract rotation pieces and 3 unprotected 1st rounders well in the future (so they may have more value).  That seems like a good value for Mitchell, Beasely, and Gay. 

Cleveland could really use a guy like Smart.  They need some his nasty and I think he'd be a great compliment to not just Garland, but also Mobley and Allen.  The Cavs would be a top tier team in the East next year if they stay healthy.  They'd have excitement, and they don't appear to want Sexton back anyway, so getting Smart for him is a good value type move (also cheaper).

Boston gets a much better 3rd option (or a 2nd option pushing Brown down) and Brogdon then becomes the best 4th option in the sport.  The top 3 players are all in their 20's and signed for multiple years.  The team clearly needs some big man depth, but there are some vet minimum guys around and White may be expendable with that roster configuration to find the players needed.

Boston post trades and signing Dwight (or Whiteside or someone similar) to a vet minimum

Starters - Brogdon, Mitchell, Brown, Tatum, Horford
Main Rotation - Beasley, White, Gay, Gallo, Dwight

That seems like the best team in the sport, if healthy.  No one could defend that starting unit and they have plus defenders at 4 of the 5 spots.  And the overall talent is there with a top 10ish player at the top, 2 top 20ish players, and 2 top 40ish players.  You have a good mix of scoring and defense on the bench. 

[GreenlyGreeny]

Being a defense-first kind of guy I am not a huge fan of Mitchell’s game, but the dude can score. No doubt whatsoever. He’s a bit too short/small for our defensive schemes, and I just worry his offensive output would cost us way too much to obtain. For example, Timelord and Smart? No way…JB? No way…Brogdon, Gallinari, Kornet and our remaining picks/swaps after 10/10/22 when we can trade Gallo? Very hard to pass that up, particularly since it gives us leverage in contract negotiations with JB, but there’s surely better deals out there for Utah…and even if we did do that, we may have trouble getting quality MLE guys in the future after two years in a row of dealing them away for upgrades lol

Mitchell would be a better “asset” than JB in the sense that he’s widely perceived as having higher value than JB (simply because of the bias in favor of shooting above all the other skills that contribute to basketball W’s), and his contract is three or four years (cannot remember if there’s a player option on the fourth year). But if I knew for sure we could extend JB, I’d rather have JB than send out JB for Mitchell, only to later try moving Mitchell for that true two-way number two guy to JT. JB is a legit two-way dude and better for our system than Mitchell. That said, adding Mitchell to JT/JB/Timelord/Smart would make us unstoppable.

Circling back to Brogdon, Gallinari, Kornet (the dollars work with or without Kornet but dumping him saves almost a mil.), and our remaining picks/swaps (Danny’s going to want them all and that’s if there’s not a better deal out there for him)…even if they wanted Pritchard instead of Kornet, obviously not a deal-breaker and easy to understand why Danny/Utah would want Pritchard…either way, such a trade would clearly give us a legit Big 3 bound to win it all (and I’d be the loudest voice of putting Danny’s banner up in the rafters if he did us this solid)—we’d just do for Mitchell what we used to do with IT on defense, and all would be well on offense since nobody could double-team JT without being absolutely burnt by Donovan:

Smart/D-White
Mitchell/D-White
JB/G. Williams
JT/Horford or G. Williams
Timelord/Horford

Bench: Ring-chasing 5/4, Pritchard (or Kornet if we deal PP instead), Kabengele, Hauser, Begarin, Ryan and/or Davison

We then extend JB in the off-season or deal him as an expiring for a number three guy who’s got a good contract for a few years. Extend Horford and Grant Williams. Keep looking for the next Max Struss in GLeague/free agency, hope we get another dude like the Williams’ Bros. with the picks we have to make in the late 20s (preferably the 30th pick each time), and always add a ring-chasing vet or two to round out the bench.

I love it…it really would be a dynasty of the 2020s and early 2030s if JT/JB/Mitchell/Timelord/Smart all agreed to play out their careers in Boston…that’s the dream, right?

[Vermont Green]

I don't think it makes any sense to bring in Mitchell unless you plan to start him and have him as a core player.  Most of the scenarios that people are presenting do this but also push Tatum to play as our PF.

The only time the Celtics played with 1-big as the primary line up was when we had Gordon Hayward and our record was demonstratively worse than during the recent periods when we played with 2 bigs.  Especially this past season.  That is not going to make us better.

If you bring in Mitchell for say Brogdon and White, he is going to start.  The starting line up will be:

Mitchell
Brown
Tatum
Horford
RWill

Smart goes to the bench.  With this trade, you are hopefully making the starters better.  Maybe you are.  You are asking Mitchell to assume a different role, but maybe he can handle that.  But you diminish our top 8/9 depth by giving up Brogdon and White.  If you don't think that line up works together, you don't do the trade.  You don't do the trade anyways and then make Tatum play out of position.

I see no need to do this trade.  I think Mitchell is good but I see no place for him on the current Celtics.  You either end up asking him to play out of position or you force Tatum to play out of position.  It makes no sense to me.  I get he is an intriguing player, but I don't see him working on the current Celtics.

[Jvalin]

Homerism runs rampant on this board. Only on a Celtics forum would the vast majority of posters rank Brown over Mitchell. For what it's worth, Mitchell has been an all-star 3 times in his 5-year career, despite playing for a small market team. Jaylen has been an all-star just once in 6 years. Basketball-wise, Mitchell is hands down a better shot creator (= can create his own shot + can create shots for his teammates). This fact alone makes him a better #1 option, hence a more talented player compared to Brown.

[A Future of Stevens]

In a vacuum, Mitchell is the better primary scorer than Jaylen. Jaylen is better off ball, better catch and shooter, and miles better defensively.

I also am not a fan of undersized score first guards. Mitchell is 6'1. That's an inch shorter than Curry. He is essentially the same height as Pritchard.

There is no way I would give up Brown for him.

[colincb]

The advanced +/- numbers for the last three years suggest that Mitchell is a very slightly better player overall because of his offense, but Brown's clearly the better defensive player, and both are very good players. Mitchell would be a defensive target in the playoffs, though, and not as good a fit.

[CelticD]

The advanced +/- numbers for the last three years suggest that Mitchell is a very slightly better player overall because of his offense, but Brown's clearly the better defensive player, and both are very good players. Mitchell would be a defensive target in the playoffs, though, and not as good a fit.

I think this is a good take. As bad as Mitchell's defense is, his offense is so much better than Brown it's not even close. I think Brown is a high-end 3rd option scorer, playing as a 2nd option, and Mitchell is a high-end 2nd option playing as a first.

[Jvalin]

The advanced +/- numbers for the last three years suggest that Mitchell is a very slightly better player overall because of his offense, but Brown's clearly the better defensive player, and both are very good players. Mitchell would be a defensive target in the playoffs, though, and not as good a fit.

I think this is a good take. As bad as Mitchell's defense is, his offense is so much better than Brown it's not even close. I think Brown is a high-end 3rd option scorer, playing as a 2nd option, and Mitchell is a high-end 2nd option playing as a first.

Mitchell is far too ball dominant to be a 2nd option. The way I see it, he can either be a 1st option or a 6th man. Problem is, the only player at his size (6'1'' or under) who has led a team to a championship is Isiah Thomas. Nobody else has done it. It's not impossible to happen, but it's very unlikely.

To put it another way, Mitchell is a bad #1 option. He cannot be a #2 option cause he needs the ball in his hands. Brown is a mediocre #2 option or an elite #3. He cannot be a #1 option cause he cannot consistently create shots for his teammates. He's just a scorer, not a shot creator.

From a team-building perspective, I'd rather have a mediocre #2 than a bad #1, but that doesn't make Brown a better player.

[td450]

The advanced +/- numbers for the last three years suggest that Mitchell is a very slightly better player overall because of his offense, but Brown's clearly the better defensive player, and both are very good players. Mitchell would be a defensive target in the playoffs, though, and not as good a fit.

I think this is a good take. As bad as Mitchell's defense is, his offense is so much better than Brown it's not even close. I think Brown is a high-end 3rd option scorer, playing as a 2nd option, and Mitchell is a high-end 2nd option playing as a first.

Why is it not even close? Mitchell is given the keys to the car much like Tatum is here. Aesthetically, he looks more like what fans expect for a great scorer, but when you just look at results, it's hard to argue he's any better at all on offense. Fans tend to discount Jaylen a lot because of style points.

Brown provides a lot of scoring without needing an offense built around him. He doesn't get in Tatum's way. I doubt Mitchell could come here and score 25 ppg without some subtracting from Tatum and others on offense.

[Who]

I don't understand why people believe Donovan Mitchell is such a great 2nd option or even 3rd option.

He is a ball-dominant player. He needs a heavy dose of touches, time on the ball and shot attempts. Both for his own scoring & his playmaking for others. So he has a high level of needs.

He is a fairly average shooter. He doesn't get much offense from off the ball movement. So he is not good at playing off of other high level offensive players. 

His playmaking revolves around his scoring. You take away some of his scoring opportunities -- which are sky high playing on a limited shot-creation team in Utah -- and the quantity of his playmaking will fall.

He is not a great decision maker in terms of his passing. He is more good than great and even inconsistent at that. He is not a natural PG. He is a scorer who is willing to pass.

He does not contribute much either as a defender or rebounder. If anything, he is a negative contributor in both areas.

Why do people think he is such a high caliber 2nd or 3rd option?

I feel he is cast correctly in Utah as a low-grade 1st option. Put him on an offensively limited defensively talented team (only Gobert in Utah) and let him have a large dose of touches, time on the ball, and shot attempts ... and he can make things work well enough to compete.

Put him in a smaller role and his offensive contributions fall dramatically, his non-scoring contributions weight heavier relative to his new lower offensive play and his net impact is much lower.

[LaBran Jaymes]

Mitchell is the better offensive player whereas Brown is the better defensive player.

[DefenseWinsChamps]

Mitchell is the better offensive player whereas Brown is the better defensive player.

I'm not convinced that Mitchell is a better offensive player than Brown. And he is a much, much worse defensive player.

[gouki88]

Mitchell is the better offensive player whereas Brown is the better defensive player.

I'm not convinced that Mitchell is a better offensive player than Brown. And he is a much, much worse defensive player.

Mitchell scores more and assists much more. Slightly less efficient, for sure. He is also far ahead on OBPM, OEPM, O-Raptor and O-LEBRON stats.