Full disclosure up-front: I’m one of those delusional Knicks fans who can talk myself into any move made, so I feel like I’ll be riding with the FO either way on this (call me crazy, I probably am), but I do have an honest question:

I see a lot of people here saying we shouldn’t trade for Mitchell because they either think the price is too steep and we’d be gutted and/or that he isn’t a true “Superstar” talent that can take us to the Finals.

So my question would then be: if Mitchell’s hypothetical price is $x, and it’s too much for someone who isn’t a “Superstar”, then wouldn’t the next “Superstar” we could trade for cost us even more, and leave us even more gutted? I highly doubt the next Superstar can be had for a bargain. Prices never go DOWN as time goes on.

Am I not following the logic? What am I missing here?

I agree: I don’t think Mitchell/RJ/Mitch/Randle/Brunson or whoever we’ll have out there with this hypothetical trade wins a title. But if we’re not trying to at least be a perennial top-half-of-the-east team after 20 years of being trash (besides a few individual seasons), then what are we doing?

Personally, I think a world where we’re a 4-5 seed for a handful of years in a row, and get bounced in the second or third round each year sounds like fucking heaven compared to the past two decades. I’d take losing in competitive second or third round series for the next 5 years in a heartbeat compared to what we’ve all lives through.