tidho wrote:jbk1234 wrote:tidho wrote:
It's not just the firsts that you have to trade.
After the deal you have Mitchell, KCP, Hunter, Mobley, Allen as part of your rotation. Then you need 5 more guys, including another guard that can create, wing depth, and a 3rd big.
To fill those five spots you have: two 1sts, two late 2nds, Black, Da Silva, Strus, Okoro, Wade, CPJ, Tyson, and probably at least one of Merril or Jerome if you want.
...and no if you trade for Herb Jones it doesn't force you to trade Allen. That's the voice of someone actively trying to make this more difficult than it is.
I have the radical belief that you should, at a minimum, be able to name your starting 5 after trading your all star PG and breaking up a 64 win team. We have a platoon of guys who will replace that production really doesn't do it for me after watching Ty go -41 per 100 possessions in the Pacers series. Defenses get better as you move on. Teams scout role players tendencies. It's gets harder to score, not easier as you advance.
I would not trade Garland with the idea that you could maybe put a better team at some undetermined future date by trading role players and late firsts.
Again, you can have whatever the second (or even second and third) deal is done before you pull the trigger on this. We're talking transitive property of multiplication here. Garland carries so much value, whether it's one player of five, theoretically a trade you make will continue to hold the same value. In this case there is value to spare because, while it would be nice, we don't have to get more values back to win the trade, just better fitting value.
My issue is you cannot articulate the better fitting pieces trade that should be done simultaneously and you happen to think KCP is some kind of better fitting piece rather than an overpaid role player. If you accept a lowball offers for Garland, I don't believe that your better fitting pieces trade ever materializes.
The Knicks have better defenders the Pacers. They have the long wings who are good defenders that everyone is convinced are the solution. The Pacers just sent them home.
If I ran the Cavs, I'd be questioning how much I was willing to pay Ty and Merrill. Neither player was able to effectively fill in for Garland in that Pacers series and both of them are defensive liabilities. Maybe an easier resolution would be to rotate in better defenders off the bench.
