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
CLE/SAC Not a Garland trade
Moderators: MoneyTalks41890, HartfordWhalers, Texas Chuck, BullyKing, Andre Roberstan, loserX, Trader_Joe, Mamba4Goat, pacers33granger
CLE/SAC Not a Garland trade
- longfellow44
- Head Coach
- Posts: 6,020
- And1: 233
- Joined: May 04, 2007
- Location: Washinton DC
Re: CLE/SAC Not a Garland trade
-
- Retired Mod
- Posts: 58,702
- And1: 35,759
- Joined: Dec 22, 2010
-
Re: CLE/SAC Not a Garland trade
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.
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.
Re: CLE/SAC Not a Garland trade
-
- Veteran
- Posts: 2,747
- And1: 2,269
- Joined: Jan 25, 2025
-
Re: CLE/SAC Not a Garland trade
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.
Okoro or another piece + 2nd + Cash to Sacramento's TPE? Sure.
Re: CLE/SAC Not a Garland trade
- Scoot McGroot
- Retired Mod
- Posts: 44,693
- And1: 13,929
- Joined: Feb 16, 2005
-
Re: CLE/SAC Not a Garland trade
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.
Re: CLE/SAC Not a Garland trade
-
- General Manager
- Posts: 9,621
- And1: 3,161
- Joined: Jun 12, 2009
Re: CLE/SAC Not a Garland trade
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.
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.
Re: CLE/SAC Not a Garland trade
- longfellow44
- Head Coach
- Posts: 6,020
- And1: 233
- Joined: May 04, 2007
- Location: Washinton DC
Re: CLE/SAC Not a Garland trade
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.
Re: CLE/SAC Not a Garland trade
-
- Lead Assistant
- Posts: 5,121
- And1: 2,481
- Joined: Jul 18, 2013
-
Re: CLE/SAC Not a Garland trade
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.)
Re: CLE/SAC Not a Garland trade
-
- Lead Assistant
- Posts: 5,652
- And1: 1,344
- Joined: Oct 02, 2005
Re: CLE/SAC Not a Garland trade
I like this.
Send something dead money to make the second apron factor work.
Send something dead money to make the second apron factor work.
Re: CLE/SAC Not a Garland trade
-
- RealGM
- Posts: 21,790
- And1: 13,739
- Joined: Nov 13, 2019
-
Re: CLE/SAC Not a Garland trade
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