CLE/SAC Not a Garland trade

Moderators: MoneyTalks41890, HartfordWhalers, Texas Chuck, BullyKing, Andre Roberstan, loserX, Trader_Joe, Mamba4Goat, pacers33granger

User avatar
longfellow44
Head Coach
Posts: 6,020
And1: 233
Joined: May 04, 2007
Location: Washinton DC

CLE/SAC Not a Garland trade 

Post#1 » by longfellow44 » Wed Jun 11, 2025 4:50 am

Derozan, TPE for Hunter and Okoro

This is a trade that does a lot for both teams. The Cavs upgrade from Hunter to Derozan, and they save enough money to resign Ty Jerome this allows the cavs to improve their roster without losing any off their core players.

For the kings this brings in two long forwards, Hunter who should likely start, and Okoro who can back up both forward spots. I think Hunter is potentially good enough to shift Lavine back to SG and allow us to bring Monk off the bench and greatly improve the bench. Kings still need to find a point guard
jbk1234
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 58,702
And1: 35,759
Joined: Dec 22, 2010
 

Re: CLE/SAC Not a Garland trade 

Post#2 » by jbk1234 » Wed Jun 11, 2025 4:59 am

I don't have DDR as an upgrade over Hunter in the playoffs. I don't have him as filling a need on the Cavs roster.
cbosh4mvp wrote:
Jarret Allen isn’t winning you anything. Garland won’t show up in the playoffs. Mobley is a glorified dunk man. Mitchell has some experience but is a liability on defense. To me, the Cavs are a treadmill team.
ReggiesKnicks
Veteran
Posts: 2,747
And1: 2,269
Joined: Jan 25, 2025
   

Re: CLE/SAC Not a Garland trade 

Post#3 » by ReggiesKnicks » Wed Jun 11, 2025 5:03 am

Hunter is a much better shooter than Demar and better defender. I don't see Cleveland considering this.

Okoro or another piece + 2nd + Cash to Sacramento's TPE? Sure.
User avatar
Scoot McGroot
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 44,693
And1: 13,929
Joined: Feb 16, 2005
     

Re: CLE/SAC Not a Garland trade 

Post#4 » by Scoot McGroot » Wed Jun 11, 2025 12:41 pm

ReggiesKnicks wrote:Hunter is a much better shooter than Demar and better defender. I don't see Cleveland considering this.

Okoro or another piece + 2nd + Cash to Sacramento's TPE? Sure.


Agreed. Cleveland doesn’t need another guy to get a bucket. They have Mitchell and Garland. They need a guy that can do a bit of everything: shoot, slash, defend, and just fit in. Hunter is the better fit overall for them.

And yeah, something smaller of just Okoro into an exception would make much more sense for Cleveland, even if they had to pay a 2nd or two. Though, I have a hunch if they don’t insist on getting it done before July 1, they can wait and see who loses a free agent, and work out a deal where they send Okoro into someone’s outgoing sign and trade.
tidho
General Manager
Posts: 9,621
And1: 3,161
Joined: Jun 12, 2009

Re: CLE/SAC Not a Garland trade 

Post#5 » by tidho » Wed Jun 11, 2025 4:06 pm

First, CLE can't do multiple guys -4- a single guy deal.

I don't this DD has much more value than Hunter, if any. If a Garland/KMurray deal was already done, maybe there would be room for something like this because CLE would have the need for a good half court creator.
User avatar
longfellow44
Head Coach
Posts: 6,020
And1: 233
Joined: May 04, 2007
Location: Washinton DC

Re: CLE/SAC Not a Garland trade 

Post#6 » by longfellow44 » Wed Jun 11, 2025 4:30 pm

tidho wrote:First, CLE can't do multiple guys -4- a single guy deal.

I don't this DD has much more value than Hunter, if any. If a Garland/KMurray deal was already done, maybe there would be room for something like this because CLE would have the need for a good half court creator.

The tpe that the kings send would like include Terrence Davis to fix this issue. The trade works in the trade checker.
toooskies
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,121
And1: 2,481
Joined: Jul 18, 2013
     

Re: CLE/SAC Not a Garland trade 

Post#7 » by toooskies » Wed Jun 11, 2025 6:53 pm

longfellow44 wrote:
tidho wrote:First, CLE can't do multiple guys -4- a single guy deal.

I don't this DD has much more value than Hunter, if any. If a Garland/KMurray deal was already done, maybe there would be room for something like this because CLE would have the need for a good half court creator.

The tpe that the kings send would like include Terrence Davis to fix this issue. The trade works in the trade checker.

Fanspo's site doesn't have Mobley's DPOY/All-NBA raise in their salary numbers, so while your deal gets the Cavs under the 2nd apron on their site, it doesn't actually get the Cavs there. So the Cavs can't aggregate, even though they can in Fanspo. (If you're using a different trade checker, make sure they've got Mobley earning what Mitchell is earning in 2025-26.)
OGSactownballer
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,652
And1: 1,344
Joined: Oct 02, 2005

Re: CLE/SAC Not a Garland trade 

Post#8 » by OGSactownballer » Wed Jun 11, 2025 7:22 pm

I like this.

Send something dead money to make the second apron factor work.
Godaddycurse
RealGM
Posts: 21,790
And1: 13,739
Joined: Nov 13, 2019
 

Re: CLE/SAC Not a Garland trade 

Post#9 » by Godaddycurse » Wed Jun 11, 2025 7:24 pm

ReggiesKnicks wrote:Hunter is a much better shooter than Demar and better defender. I don't see Cleveland considering this.

Okoro or another piece + 2nd + Cash to Sacramento's TPE? Sure.


cleveland cant send out cash

Return to Trades and Transactions