Trade Ideas

[JujitsuFlip]

I already know its been floated multiple times, but what would it take to get Mikal Bridges and/or Cameron Johnson?

They feel like the exact type we'd want at our 3/4 and they are under contract until 2026 and 2027 respectively

Given the Nets situation, picks and the Cavs don't have that.

[jbk1234]

I already know its been floated multiple times, but what would it take to get Mikal Bridges and/or Cameron Johnson?

They feel like the exact type we'd want at our 3/4 and they are under contract until 2026 and 2027 respectively

I'm meh on Cam Johnson, but if Mitchell extends, and Garland truly wants out, the Nets should be a team that calls on him and Bridges should be the minimum returned.

[ijspeelman]

I already know its been floated multiple times, but what would it take to get Mikal Bridges and/or Cameron Johnson?

They feel like the exact type we'd want at our 3/4 and they are under contract until 2026 and 2027 respectively

I'm meh on Cam Johnson, but if Mitchell extends, and Garland truly wants out, the Nets should be a team that calls on him and Bridges should be the minimum returned.

I'm so in on Cam Johnson as a role player lol. 39.2% career avg 3P shooter on almost 11 per 100 pos...

With less of a role, he was around a +8% rTS player, but even getting worse shot quality is an above average rTS player. I also rate him as a wing defender.

[toooskies]

I already know its been floated multiple times, but what would it take to get Mikal Bridges and/or Cameron Johnson?

They feel like the exact type we'd want at our 3/4 and they are under contract until 2026 and 2027 respectively

I'm meh on Cam Johnson, but if Mitchell extends, and Garland truly wants out, the Nets should be a team that calls on him and Bridges should be the minimum returned.

I'm so in on Cam Johnson as a role player lol. 39.2% career avg 3P shooter on almost 11 per 100 pos...

With less of a role, he was around a +8% rTS player, but even getting worse shot quality is an above average rTS player. I also rate him as a wing defender.

The question is why would you trade Garland for role players?

[JujitsuFlip]

I'm meh on Cam Johnson, but if Mitchell extends, and Garland truly wants out, the Nets should be a team that calls on him and Bridges should be the minimum returned.

I'm so in on Cam Johnson as a role player lol. 39.2% career avg 3P shooter on almost 11 per 100 pos...

With less of a role, he was around a +8% rTS player, but even getting worse shot quality is an above average rTS player. I also rate him as a wing defender.

The question is why would you trade Garland for role players?

Same reason we traded Kyrie for a steamy pile of trash.

[JonFromVA]

I already know its been floated multiple times, but what would it take to get Mikal Bridges and/or Cameron Johnson?

They feel like the exact type we'd want at our 3/4 and they are under contract until 2026 and 2027 respectively

I think Cam Johnson's value has dropped quite a bit, he seems to be perceived as over payed now and while Mikal came up far short of proving himself a #1 he would presumably be much harder to pry loose. Of course in this day and age, a player in his prime like Mikal may get impatient and demand to be traded to a winner. It's just too bad nobody demands to be traded to the Cavs.

[jbk1234]

Watching how the Celtics back court has been able to lock up Kyrie makes me think we should run it back. We're as good a matchup against them as anyone.

[mcfly1204]

Watching how the Celtics back court has been able to lock up Kyrie makes me think we should run it back. We're as good a matchup against them as anyone.

It is interesting seeing how this is all playing out. Does a new coach help us to take advantage of a team like Boston inside? We still need more length on the perimeter, but Boston's perimeter defense highlights the trouble we will be in if we move Garland or Mitchell, making it that much easier for them to focus on the primary ballhandler that remains on the roster.

[JonFromVA]

Watching how the Celtics back court has been able to lock up Kyrie makes me think we should run it back. We're as good a matchup against them as anyone.

Kyrie has struggled in the past when defenses could focus in on him, it's a media/fan myth that his offensive arsenal was unstoppable.

If we have an edge on the Celtics, it's that KP is injury prone and Horford is getting ancient, but we need to see a lot more of Mobley and Allen stepping up and being able to take advantage of their matchup and not being thrown off just because opponents are allowed to push them around and elbow them in the chest when the playoffs roll around.

Otherwise, we're at a severe disadvantage because they have two way players with length who can play 5 out.

[JujitsuFlip]

Watching how the Celtics back court has been able to lock up Kyrie makes me think we should run it back. We're as good a matchup against them as anyone.

Kyrie has struggled in the past when defenses could focus in on him, it's a media/fan myth that his offensive arsenal was unstoppable.

If we have an edge on the Celtics, it's that KP is injury prone and Horford is getting ancient, but we need to see a lot more of Mobley and Allen stepping up and being able to take advantage of their matchup and not being thrown off just because opponents are allowed to push them around and elbow them in the chest when the playoffs roll around.

Otherwise, we're at a severe disadvantage because they have two way players with length who can play 5 out.

Lol right?

Idk how anyone is talking themselves into thinking the Cavs with a bunch of one way or no way guys stand a chance against a team flush with unselfish 2 way players.

[jbk1234]

Watching how the Celtics back court has been able to lock up Kyrie makes me think we should run it back. We're as good a matchup against them as anyone.

Kyrie has struggled in the past when defenses could focus in on him, it's a media/fan myth that his offensive arsenal was unstoppable.

If we have an edge on the Celtics, it's that KP is injury prone and Horford is getting ancient, but we need to see a lot more of Mobley and Allen stepping up and being able to take advantage of their matchup and not being thrown off just because opponents are allowed to push them around and elbow them in the chest when the playoffs roll around.

Otherwise, we're at a severe disadvantage because they have two way players with length who can play 5 out.

Lol right?

Idk how anyone is talking themselves into thinking the Cavs with a bunch of one way or no way guys stand a chance against a team flush with unselfish 2 way players.

I think you have to be able to outrebound them as we did in our win against them. I think Mobley has to guard Tatum which you can't do without Allen. I also think Allen is the only one on the team who can set a real screen.

[KuruptedCav]

Thoughts on the delta between (Max Strus/Caris LeVert & Georges Nieng) and John Collins;

I know he’s polarizing from last year on whether you’d want him at all, but curious on the value.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[jbk1234]

Thoughts on the delta between (Max Strus/Caris LeVert & Georges Nieng) and John Collins;

I know he’s polarizing from last year on whether you’d want him at all, but curious on the value.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I don't mean to sound harsh, but I can't think of a single good reason for the Cavs to execute that trade. The last thing we need is a really expensive backup big who can't defend. He'd be as unplayable as Niang in the playoffs, only he makes three times as much.

I also don't see him as polarizing. I think there are always rumors involving him because he makes too much for his role and whatever team he's on wants to get off his money.

[JujitsuFlip]

Thoughts on the delta between (Max Strus/Caris LeVert & Georges Nieng) and John Collins;

I know he’s polarizing from last year on whether you’d want him at all, but curious on the value.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Cavs can't waste $25 million on a guy that can't shoot consistently from deep and is an inconsistent defender at best.

[ijspeelman]

I'm meh on Cam Johnson, but if Mitchell extends, and Garland truly wants out, the Nets should be a team that calls on him and Bridges should be the minimum returned.

I'm so in on Cam Johnson as a role player lol. 39.2% career avg 3P shooter on almost 11 per 100 pos...

With less of a role, he was around a +8% rTS player, but even getting worse shot quality is an above average rTS player. I also rate him as a wing defender.

The question is why would you trade Garland for role players?

That is a loaded question and I'd 100% prefer to keep Garland than make a trade with him in it right now. I think Garland's year was fluky in how bad it was and I still believe in the Mitchell Garland fit.

I am more thinking in the lines of if he asked out we should consider selling now. Despite his season, I don't think his value has tanked too much. There are interested teams out there and that may mean some alright to good offers.

I do worry that if this year wasn't a fluke, his contract could become an albatross and hamper us moving forward. I don't really believe that is the case, but it has to be in the back of the FO's minds. On the other hand, Garland is still young and is still a potential all-star each year (could rise from there).

I've said it before, but I do not envy the FO's job this off-season.

[toooskies]

I'm so in on Cam Johnson as a role player lol. 39.2% career avg 3P shooter on almost 11 per 100 pos...

With less of a role, he was around a +8% rTS player, but even getting worse shot quality is an above average rTS player. I also rate him as a wing defender.

The question is why would you trade Garland for role players?

That is a loaded question and I'd 100% prefer to keep Garland than make a trade with him in it right now. I think Garland's year was fluky in how bad it was and I still believe in the Mitchell Garland fit.

I am more thinking in the lines of if he asked out we should consider selling now. Despite his season, I don't think his value has tanked too much. There are interested teams out there and that may mean some alright to good offers.

I do worry that if this year wasn't a fluke, his contract could become an albatross and hamper us moving forward. I don't really believe that is the case, but it has to be in the back of the FO's minds. On the other hand, Garland is still young and is still a potential all-star each year (could rise from there).

I've said it before, but I do not envy the FO's job this off-season.

His value probably tanked on 50% of teams who'd make offers and is still probably high on the other 50%, but that other 50% is going to bluff that his value tanked and get him at a bargain. And then you have to consider them weighing Garland versus the other potentially available PGs out there.

Trading Garland for role players (regardless of how well those role players fit) seriously limits the ceiling of the team. Particularly if the role players fit well enough that you don't try to flip them for other assets. You don't have to trade him just because he asks out.

[PELICANSFAN]

I've been checking out some of the various trade proposals floating around, and I kind of like one proposed by a Wolves fan that would have Garland getting traded for KAT and Allen for Ingram.

Some questioned whether Garland would be any happier being paired with Edwards than Mitchell, and I have my doubts whether we could afford 4 guys all wanting max money ... but it sure would remake the roster in a much more modern, longer, and offensive oriented manner.

Mobley would need to clean up a whole lot on defense and would likely continue to be forgotten on offense beyond dunk & dives, so, that's another potential problem.

But at least the starting 5 makes sense on paper: Mitchell-Strus-Ingram-Towns-Mobley

Garland and Allen are highly unlikely to get KAT and Ingram without other good players or several 1sts.

[jbk1234]

I've been checking out some of the various trade proposals floating around, and I kind of like one proposed by a Wolves fan that would have Garland getting traded for KAT and Allen for Ingram.

Some questioned whether Garland would be any happier being paired with Edwards than Mitchell, and I have my doubts whether we could afford 4 guys all wanting max money ... but it sure would remake the roster in a much more modern, longer, and offensive oriented manner.

Mobley would need to clean up a whole lot on defense and would likely continue to be forgotten on offense beyond dunk & dives, so, that's another potential problem.

But at least the starting 5 makes sense on paper: Mitchell-Strus-Ingram-Towns-Mobley

Garland and Allen are highly unlikely to get KAT and Ingram without other good players or several 1sts.

I don't see the Cavs constructing a team where 3 out of the 4 starters are on vet max deals and the 4th starter is on a rookie max deal. That's +120% of the cap on 4 players.

Also, there has been no reporting that the Cavs are even interested in trading for Towns and our interest in Ingram is going to be at least somewhat dependent upon what type of extension he'd be willing to sign. So while it's debatable as to whether the Wolves would swap KAT for Garland and Niang, or the Pelicans would swap Ingram for Allen and an expiring LeVert, I suspect Altman would rather run it back than build a team that handcuffed anyway.

[JonFromVA]

Kyrie has struggled in the past when defenses could focus in on him, it's a media/fan myth that his offensive arsenal was unstoppable.

If we have an edge on the Celtics, it's that KP is injury prone and Horford is getting ancient, but we need to see a lot more of Mobley and Allen stepping up and being able to take advantage of their matchup and not being thrown off just because opponents are allowed to push them around and elbow them in the chest when the playoffs roll around.

Otherwise, we're at a severe disadvantage because they have two way players with length who can play 5 out.

Lol right?

Idk how anyone is talking themselves into thinking the Cavs with a bunch of one way or no way guys stand a chance against a team flush with unselfish 2 way players.

I think you have to be able to outrebound them as we did in our win against them. I think Mobley has to guard Tatum which you can't do without Allen. I also think Allen is the only one on the team who can set a real screen.

It's hard to outrebound them when they can draw Allen and Mobley out to the perimeter and leave our guards trying to protect the rim as the Celts can literally send any of their 5 guys to attack the rim with a height advantage.

Pretty quickly we're playing a junk defense and crossing our fingers they clank open 3's while trying to bury contested shots on our end of the floor unless we really re-work our lineup.

We either need to match them strength to strength, or we need to scheme something up that they just can't stop and exploit that.

I mean I kind of like how Jason Kidd tossed it out recently that he thought Brown was the C's best player. If Tatum takes the bait, maybe he'll try to do too much and choke away some wins. But that's ultimately a junk tactic.

[JonFromVA]

Thoughts on the delta between (Max Strus/Caris LeVert & Georges Nieng) and John Collins;

I know he’s polarizing from last year on whether you’d want him at all, but curious on the value.

Last I knew, Collins was a very expensive broken toy. It'd take some convincing to want to take a chance on him after filling some box score columns for the Jazz while making them worse while he was on the floor.

Strus's shooting is inconsistent, but not his effort and savvy. Do what you want with the other two....