Moderator: ijspeelman
ijspeelman wrote:The more I read about the proposed trade, the more it sounds like the Clippers reached out in interest about Garland and the Cavs didn’t turn it down and asked for draft capital as well and Clippers said no. Then bc Harden wants out, his team leaked the news to force the issue of him out of the Clippers.
I think the trade could still happen, but it’s feeling less likely than a sure thing last night
jbk1234 wrote:ijspeelman wrote:The more I read about the proposed trade, the more it sounds like the Clippers reached out in interest about Garland and the Cavs didn’t turn it down and asked for draft capital as well and Clippers said no. Then bc Harden wants out, his team leaked the news to force the issue of him out of the Clippers.
I think the trade could still happen, but it’s feeling less likely than a sure thing last night
I'd rather do the MPJ swap and I really don't want that.
jbk1234 wrote:toooskies wrote:jbk1234 wrote:
I don't know that Giannis is a top 3 player in the NBA, but for the sake of discussion, let's assume he is. He's not that easy to build a team around and he hasn't had the type of postseason success you'd expect from a top 3 player. The latter is the decisive factor for me. If his rank doesn't consistently translate to playoff success, why pay the premium?
Umm, one title on a team that hasn’t developed a draft pick since COVID is about what I’d expect. LeBron won 1 title in 11 poorly managed Cleveland years, as the comparison point to Giannis’s 12+ in Milwaukee.
How many years did he play with Jrue, Middleton, and BroLo?
How many years did they get out of the second round?
LBJ made it to the Finals 5 times.
gflem wrote:jbk1234 wrote:ijspeelman wrote:The more I read about the proposed trade, the more it sounds like the Clippers reached out in interest about Garland and the Cavs didn’t turn it down and asked for draft capital as well and Clippers said no. Then bc Harden wants out, his team leaked the news to force the issue of him out of the Clippers.
I think the trade could still happen, but it’s feeling less likely than a sure thing last night
I'd rather do the MPJ swap and I really don't want that.
Coming around to the dark side I see! Seriously though, I soured on Harden a long time ago and never thought I would consider trading for him. However, I can see the logic in the rumored deal IF it is the team trying to do a Toronto/Kawhai rent-a-title this season.
If Harden is a rental AND the Cavs can get some decent draft capital (ie a lotto protected first) a move like this makes some sense. It would allow the team to dodge the 2nd apron, gain some draft capital for a future move and give the team another weapon for the playoffs this season. I know Harden has had some flame outs in the playoffs and how he would fit with Donovan would be crucial to any success this could have but if he could come here have a solid playoff run, fit in with the existing structure and win a title it would go a long way to rehabbing his image and possibly earn him another lucrative contract to finish out his career.
So, to me there would be a lot of potential positives for Harden to come here both for him and the team. And I know that many here will disagree but the risks of a Harden/Garland trade are somewhat negated by being able to get off Garland's contract early and possibly reshaping the too small backcourt in the near future.
jbk1234 wrote:gflem wrote:jbk1234 wrote:
I'd rather do the MPJ swap and I really don't want that.
Coming around to the dark side I see! Seriously though, I soured on Harden a long time ago and never thought I would consider trading for him. However, I can see the logic in the rumored deal IF it is the team trying to do a Toronto/Kawhai rent-a-title this season.
If Harden is a rental AND the Cavs can get some decent draft capital (ie a lotto protected first) a move like this makes some sense. It would allow the team to dodge the 2nd apron, gain some draft capital for a future move and give the team another weapon for the playoffs this season. I know Harden has had some flame outs in the playoffs and how he would fit with Donovan would be crucial to any success this could have but if he could come here have a solid playoff run, fit in with the existing structure and win a title it would go a long way to rehabbing his image and possibly earn him another lucrative contract to finish out his career.
So, to me there would be a lot of potential positives for Harden to come here both for him and the team. And I know that many here will disagree but the risks of a Harden/Garland trade are somewhat negated by being able to get off Garland's contract early and possibly reshaping the too small backcourt in the near future.
Yeah, this is just wanting off Garland come what may. Harden hasn't had a good playoff performance since Obama was president and he wants an extension. If you want to reset the backcourt, you either need to slide Tyson to the two and fill the three with the Garland return (MPJ) or you need currency for a follow up move (picks). There is no comparison between prime Leonard and old man Harden. Harden is not the answer to any problem the Cavs have.
ijspeelman wrote:The more I read about the proposed trade, the more it sounds like the Clippers reached out in interest about Garland and the Cavs didn’t turn it down and asked for draft capital as well and Clippers said no. Then bc Harden wants out, his team leaked the news to force the issue of him out of the Clippers.
I think the trade could still happen, but it’s feeling less likely than a sure thing last night
gflem wrote:jbk1234 wrote:gflem wrote:Coming around to the dark side I see! Seriously though, I soured on Harden a long time ago and never thought I would consider trading for him. However, I can see the logic in the rumored deal IF it is the team trying to do a Toronto/Kawhai rent-a-title this season.
If Harden is a rental AND the Cavs can get some decent draft capital (ie a lotto protected first) a move like this makes some sense. It would allow the team to dodge the 2nd apron, gain some draft capital for a future move and give the team another weapon for the playoffs this season. I know Harden has had some flame outs in the playoffs and how he would fit with Donovan would be crucial to any success this could have but if he could come here have a solid playoff run, fit in with the existing structure and win a title it would go a long way to rehabbing his image and possibly earn him another lucrative contract to finish out his career.
So, to me there would be a lot of potential positives for Harden to come here both for him and the team. And I know that many here will disagree but the risks of a Harden/Garland trade are somewhat negated by being able to get off Garland's contract early and possibly reshaping the too small backcourt in the near future.
Yeah, this is just wanting off Garland come what may. Harden hasn't had a good playoff performance since Obama was president and he wants an extension. If you want to reset the backcourt, you either need to slide Tyson to the two and fill the three with the Garland return (MPJ) or you need currency for a follow up move (picks). There is no comparison between prime Leonard and old man Harden. Harden is not the answer to any problem the Cavs have.
I too would prefer the MPJ trade. But the Nets just drafted 4 PG's so I don't see that as a realistic possibility. The Nets aren't desperate, and if Harden let it be known he isn't happy he is about become a huge distraction if the Clips don't move him now.
And yes, this is likely the team just wanting off Garland. The question is whether the risk of Harden being effective for a playoff run over whether Garland is even available for a playoff run imo.
I think the team is at a crossroads and their choice of Donovan over Garland is one they were going to have to make at some point. A Harden deal would be easy enough to sell to the casual fan, but would be like "ripping the bandaid off" to us avid fans. I really do like Garland and enjoy watching him play but if the goal is to win a title I just don't see it with the small backcourt.
jbk1234 wrote:ijspeelman wrote:The more I read about the proposed trade, the more it sounds like the Clippers reached out in interest about Garland and the Cavs didn’t turn it down and asked for draft capital as well and Clippers said no. Then bc Harden wants out, his team leaked the news to force the issue of him out of the Clippers.
I think the trade could still happen, but it’s feeling less likely than a sure thing last night
I'd rather do the MPJ swap and I really don't want that.
jbk1234 wrote:gflem wrote:jbk1234 wrote:
Yeah, this is just wanting off Garland come what may. Harden hasn't had a good playoff performance since Obama was president and he wants an extension. If you want to reset the backcourt, you either need to slide Tyson to the two and fill the three with the Garland return (MPJ) or you need currency for a follow up move (picks). There is no comparison between prime Leonard and old man Harden. Harden is not the answer to any problem the Cavs have.
I too would prefer the MPJ trade. But the Nets just drafted 4 PG's so I don't see that as a realistic possibility. The Nets aren't desperate, and if Harden let it be known he isn't happy he is about become a huge distraction if the Clips don't move him now.
And yes, this is likely the team just wanting off Garland. The question is whether the risk of Harden being effective for a playoff run over whether Garland is even available for a playoff run imo.
I think the team is at a crossroads and their choice of Donovan over Garland is one they were going to have to make at some point. A Harden deal would be easy enough to sell to the casual fan, but would be like "ripping the bandaid off" to us avid fans. I really do like Garland and enjoy watching him play but if the goal is to win a title I just don't see it with the small backcourt.
Hunter and Ball are both tall. That's where Harden is defensively. You're going to have hide him defensively.
I don't buy for a second that the Nets wouldn't do a MPJ for Garland swap. Anytime you read, repeatedly, that the Nets want to firsts for MPJ and won't move him unless they get it, what you're really hearing is that no one thinks MPJ is worth two firsts.
In any event, if you sell low on Garland there are no Mulligans. If all you get is future cap savings, that's all you get. If you need picks to make future moves, your next available first is 2031. If you haven't improved your odds a championship as a result of the trade, you're unlikely to improve via future moves.
toooskies wrote:jbk1234 wrote:gflem wrote:I too would prefer the MPJ trade. But the Nets just drafted 4 PG's so I don't see that as a realistic possibility. The Nets aren't desperate, and if Harden let it be known he isn't happy he is about become a huge distraction if the Clips don't move him now.
And yes, this is likely the team just wanting off Garland. The question is whether the risk of Harden being effective for a playoff run over whether Garland is even available for a playoff run imo.
I think the team is at a crossroads and their choice of Donovan over Garland is one they were going to have to make at some point. A Harden deal would be easy enough to sell to the casual fan, but would be like "ripping the bandaid off" to us avid fans. I really do like Garland and enjoy watching him play but if the goal is to win a title I just don't see it with the small backcourt.
Hunter and Ball are both tall. That's where Harden is defensively. You're going to have hide him defensively.
I don't buy for a second that the Nets wouldn't do a MPJ for Garland swap. Anytime you read, repeatedly, that the Nets want to firsts for MPJ and won't move him unless they get it, what you're really hearing is that no one thinks MPJ is worth two firsts.
In any event, if you sell low on Garland there are no Mulligans. If all you get is future cap savings, that's all you get. If you need picks to make future moves, your next available first is 2031. If you haven't improved your odds a championship as a result of the trade, you're unlikely to improve via future moves.
I think the Nets only have this year's draft pick under their control, have more cap space than good targets this offseason, and aren't interested selling low on MPJ. At the same time they might want to sell on their rookie PGs (particularly Traore/Saraf) and try to be good next year.
There is no guarantee that Garland's value can't go lower. A playoff injury or poor performance, or a toe tweak next season, and he's a bloated salary that expires in a year and a half.
Regardless of the decision you make on Garland's current value it's not an obvious conclusion that he'll be worth more next year, he's worth holding onto, or that he even increases the chances Mitchell stays in town over your other options.
There is upside that we've seen, but there's downside too.
toooskies wrote:jbk1234 wrote:gflem wrote:I too would prefer the MPJ trade. But the Nets just drafted 4 PG's so I don't see that as a realistic possibility. The Nets aren't desperate, and if Harden let it be known he isn't happy he is about become a huge distraction if the Clips don't move him now.
And yes, this is likely the team just wanting off Garland. The question is whether the risk of Harden being effective for a playoff run over whether Garland is even available for a playoff run imo.
I think the team is at a crossroads and their choice of Donovan over Garland is one they were going to have to make at some point. A Harden deal would be easy enough to sell to the casual fan, but would be like "ripping the bandaid off" to us avid fans. I really do like Garland and enjoy watching him play but if the goal is to win a title I just don't see it with the small backcourt.
Hunter and Ball are both tall. That's where Harden is defensively. You're going to have hide him defensively.
I don't buy for a second that the Nets wouldn't do a MPJ for Garland swap. Anytime you read, repeatedly, that the Nets want to firsts for MPJ and won't move him unless they get it, what you're really hearing is that no one thinks MPJ is worth two firsts.
In any event, if you sell low on Garland there are no Mulligans. If all you get is future cap savings, that's all you get. If you need picks to make future moves, your next available first is 2031. If you haven't improved your odds a championship as a result of the trade, you're unlikely to improve via future moves.
I think the Nets only have this year's draft pick under their control, have more cap space than good targets this offseason, and aren't interested selling low on MPJ. At the same time they might want to sell on their rookie PGs (particularly Traore/Saraf) and try to be good next year.
There is no guarantee that Garland's value can't go lower. A playoff injury or poor performance, or a toe tweak next season, and he's a bloated salary that expires in a year and a half.
Regardless of the decision you make on Garland's current value it's not an obvious conclusion that he'll be worth more next year, he's worth holding onto, or that he even increases the chances Mitchell stays in town over your other options.
There is upside that we've seen, but there's downside too.
gflem wrote:toooskies wrote:jbk1234 wrote:
Hunter and Ball are both tall. That's where Harden is defensively. You're going to have hide him defensively.
I don't buy for a second that the Nets wouldn't do a MPJ for Garland swap. Anytime you read, repeatedly, that the Nets want to firsts for MPJ and won't move him unless they get it, what you're really hearing is that no one thinks MPJ is worth two firsts.
In any event, if you sell low on Garland there are no Mulligans. If all you get is future cap savings, that's all you get. If you need picks to make future moves, your next available first is 2031. If you haven't improved your odds a championship as a result of the trade, you're unlikely to improve via future moves.
I think the Nets only have this year's draft pick under their control, have more cap space than good targets this offseason, and aren't interested selling low on MPJ. At the same time they might want to sell on their rookie PGs (particularly Traore/Saraf) and try to be good next year.
There is no guarantee that Garland's value can't go lower. A playoff injury or poor performance, or a toe tweak next season, and he's a bloated salary that expires in a year and a half.
Regardless of the decision you make on Garland's current value it's not an obvious conclusion that he'll be worth more next year, he's worth holding onto, or that he even increases the chances Mitchell stays in town over your other options.
There is upside that we've seen, but there's downside too.
The money line in your post is bolded. I think that most fans here refuse to even think about that, but that has been the point of most of my debates in regard to Garland. If he could stay healthy his contract wouldn't be the albatross that I believe it to be, even with his subpar defense. There is a real possibility that bringing Harden to the Cavs could blow up in their face, but at least the team has decided that sitting on their hands and hoping for good luck on the injuries not a good plan.
jbk1234 wrote:gflem wrote:toooskies wrote:I think the Nets only have this year's draft pick under their control, have more cap space than good targets this offseason, and aren't interested selling low on MPJ. At the same time they might want to sell on their rookie PGs (particularly Traore/Saraf) and try to be good next year.
There is no guarantee that Garland's value can't go lower. A playoff injury or poor performance, or a toe tweak next season, and he's a bloated salary that expires in a year and a half.
Regardless of the decision you make on Garland's current value it's not an obvious conclusion that he'll be worth more next year, he's worth holding onto, or that he even increases the chances Mitchell stays in town over your other options.
There is upside that we've seen, but there's downside too.
The money line in your post is bolded. I think that most fans here refuse to even think about that, but that has been the point of most of my debates in regard to Garland. If he could stay healthy his contract wouldn't be the albatross that I believe it to be, even with his subpar defense. There is a real possibility that bringing Harden to the Cavs could blow up in their face, but at least the team has decided that sitting on their hands and hoping for good luck on the injuries not a good plan.
Darius Garland is a two-time, 25-year old, all star with actual PG skills. He's not an undersized SG who plays PG. Trading him for a 36-year old, past-his-sell-by-date Harden is essentially conceding you don't think he'll be right again. You better be right about that.
It's not a my bad situation if you're wrong. If he goes out to L.A., heals up, and ends up helping the Clippers advance in the playoffs, while the Cavs falter, you deserve to be fired.
gflem wrote:jbk1234 wrote:gflem wrote:The money line in your post is bolded. I think that most fans here refuse to even think about that, but that has been the point of most of my debates in regard to Garland. If he could stay healthy his contract wouldn't be the albatross that I believe it to be, even with his subpar defense. There is a real possibility that bringing Harden to the Cavs could blow up in their face, but at least the team has decided that sitting on their hands and hoping for good luck on the injuries not a good plan.
Darius Garland is a two-time, 25-year old, all star with actual PG skills. He's not an undersized SG who plays PG. Trading him for a 36-year old, past-his-sell-by-date Harden is essentially conceding you don't think he'll be right again. You better be right about that.
It's not a my bad situation if you're wrong. If he goes out to L.A., heals up, and ends up helping the Clippers advance in the playoffs, while the Cavs falter, you deserve to be fired.
Unless you have some sort of mandate from ownership. But even then it could still end up costing the GM his job.
JonFromVA wrote:
Didn't Smooth steal that from your post on RCF? Or did you guys have the same thought at roughly the same time?
