The Cavaliers wanted Donovan Mitchell in Cleveland for the long haul. The bill for making that happen is what has ESPN’s Ben Golliver raising an eyebrow.
Mitchell signed a four-year, $273 million maximum extension this offseason, a deal that Golliver wrote “deserves more scrutiny.”
The numbers are certainly enormous. Mitchell will earn more than $60 million in 2027-28, and his contract includes a $75.5 million player option for 2030-31, when he will be 34.
Golliver compared that salary with Knicks star Jalen Brunson, who will make $40.5 million in 2027-28, and questioned whether Mitchell’s defense and playmaking justify placing him among the NBA’s highest-paid players. He ultimately described the extension as “a bit ominous.”
Fair questions. From this corner, though, the extension is fine. More than fine, really.
Mitchell has become a true leader, a fantastic player and exactly the sort of person an organization should want representing it. He has embraced Cleveland, handled every question about his future professionally and become a stabilizing presence on and off the court.
The Cavs can be proud to have him as the face of the franchise. That matters.
They also weren’t choosing between Mitchell at $273 million and Brunson at $40.5 million. They were choosing between paying their franchise player and allowing uncertainty about his future to hang over everything they’ve built.
Mitchell has averaged 26.7 points during his four seasons in Cleveland and helped lead the Cavs to their first Eastern Conference finals appearance without LeBron James since 1992.
Yes, the contract could become uncomfortable near the end. That is generally how maximum contracts work.
But the bottom line? The Cavs are paying for a great player, a proven leader and someone who genuinely wants to be there. They could do considerably worse.
Looking for the latest NBA Insider News & Rumors?
Be sure to follow Hoops Wire on TWITTER and FACEBOOK for breaking NBA News and Rumors for all 30 teams!







Congrats to him and his family..
Just a question. Are we paying him for what he’s already done, what he’s doing most recently, or what we think he will do in the future?