Slava wrote:jbk1234 wrote:Slava wrote:
You mean Cleveland is adding picks? Because I don’t see a scenario where the lakers are trading the better player and picks for their trouble and I don’t see Lebron declining to a level worse than garland even in the next two seasons.
I don't really want to trade Garland for LBJ at all. I think it's pretty foolish for a team to tie up $100M in cap space on a guy turning 40 and who doesn't have another half a step to lose. Obviously, this trade wouldn't just be about the next two years as Garland is 24 and locked up. If the Lakers wouldn't add a couple picks, the Cavs move on.
I think Lebron with half a step less is still a better player than Garland could ever be and I don’t see the lakers doing the Cavs a favor by agreeing to a sign and trade, taking on a player that isn’t a needle mover and adding a couple of picks on top of that. That’s the kind of offer Daryl Morey makes for fun and gets laughed off the phone.
That's fine. As I said, I don't like the idea anyway. I was just trying to find a way to make it palatable from the Cavs perspective. Garland is under contract for 4 more years and I'm against trading him this summer. Altman's primary job, after extending Mitchell, should be getting Garland and Mitchell in a room together and seeing if there's a way to resolve this under a new coach.