Cleveland/Timberwolves/Nets/Trailblazers

[bgrep14]

Cavs: Garland, Strus, and Wade
Cavs: McDaniels, Conley, Shannon Jr, and Reath

Cavs get under 2nd apron and can now aggregate. Also add length, athleticism, and versatility

Timberwolves: McDaniels, Shannon, Dillingham, and Conley
Timberwolves: Garland and T. Martin

Losing McDaniels is a blow but they can look to move DiVencenzo or one of their 3 bigs for a SF in a followup trade but lockin a primary ball handler to play with Edwards. Also, they duck the apron.

Nets: T. Martin
Nets: Dillingham and Timelord

Take on Timelord to get a former lottery pick point guard.

Portland: Timelord and Reath
Portland: Strus and Wade

Portland adds a primary off ball shooting option in Strus which they currently lack on their team.

[tester551]

For Portland, value wise -> I like it.

Positional wise -> it leave Portland REALLY thin at C with only Clingan and Yang on the roster. I'd prefer to keep Reath and send out Murray instead.
Contract wise -> I haven't looked into it.... Portland is really close to the tax. If this doesn't push them into the tax - then great.

*** EDIT *** It looks like this would add ~$7M in salary for the Blazers, which puts them into the tax... so this is a no-go.

[jbk1234]

Assuming that the Cavs were willing to move Garland this summer, which by all appearances they are not, this is really bad for the Cavs. That team can't score enough in the playoffs to win. I don't think it can score enough in the regular season to finish with a top 4 seed. Mitchell has gotten injured the last two postseason runs trying to do too much himself. The Cavs really needed to retain Jerome if they were going to do something like this.

Also, the Cavs need draft capital back in a Garland trade as a hedge against the picks owed from the Mitchell trade.

[toooskies]

Brooklyn just drafted three 1st round PGs, they are not the best destination for Dillingham.

Cleveland could break this into three deals, none of which I'd do:
- Garland (and Wade offload, for salary matching) for McDaniels, Conley, Shannon, Dillingham: Really depends on how high/low you are on both Garland and McDaniels, as some people value Garland as much less than a typical All-Star and some people value McDaniels much higher than a typical all-defensive team 3-and-D wing. I have the Cleveland side worth much more. (You can make an argument that Wade is 80% of what you get from McDaniels and you'd prefer him straight-up for salary reasons, but that might not be true in the playoffs.)
- Strus for Timelord and Reath: This is nearly-matching salary. The Cavs have no business trading a starter who you can mostly rely on in the playoffs for two bench players, one of whom is frequently injured and the other who is not good. Nor is the year of salary relief worth it.
- Dillingham and Timelord for salary/roster glut relief: Do you pay a #8 pick from last year to get off a reasonable-value player on expiring contracts? I probably wouldn't.

Three bad values combined = bad trade for the Cavs.

[ecuhus1981]

Brooklyn does this all day, especially at this price point.

Yes, we just drafted a ton of on ball creators. But Rob is a different breed than any of them, possibly an higher caliber than any of them.

[mcfly1204]

Portland is sucking value out of this deal, and Brooklyn isn't doing much to help. Cut them out and see where it goes.

[Saltine]

This is utterly insane from a Wolves point of view, both our current and future PG's and young SF's??? LOL
for a PG that is always broken? put down the pipe.

[winforlose]

The Wolves are… not interested. Losing Jaden, Rob, Shannon, and Mike (who we promised not to trade in exchange for a discount on his deal,) for Garland? If you don’t think that price is too steep, then you don’t watch nearly enough Wolves basketball.

[wolves_89]

Easy no for Minnesota. I'd rather keep McDaniels/Shannon and see how Dillingham develops.

[schaffy]

I completely get the responses that Cleveland is losing too much offense in this. And I agree with them -- this would put a ton on Mitchells shoulders offensively. No question, you aren't trading for McDaniels for his current offense. Could it continue to improve? Yeah it could. If he gets back to the 40% from corner 3s, in addition to his improving mid-range game, he'll be able to be a good option when the ball gets swung to him to either be an outside threat or attack the closeout. But its his defense where he really adds a ton of value for a team and not yet his offense so I get it being a NO from them -- the pieces just dont fit well.

From my perspective for Minnesota, this absolutely guts the rotation and they dont have a lot of avenues to add to it either that I can't imagine they'd do it. Teams seem to be catching on that you need strong, playable depth in the playoffs to have a chance to get through it. I tend to view what Garland is now as like 100% actualized Dillingham. Maybe thats overly optimistic on my part. Honestly, he might never get there - which is fine, I'd say a lot of players never fully get to their 100% outcome as players. But then I'm left with, is it worth it to trade McDaniel's, TSJ, and Dillingham to go get 100% actualized Dillingham now? I just dont know that it actually makes them an overall better team in the playoffs. It makes them a different team, no doubt. But their 2 best perimeter defenders from last year -- McDaniels and NAW -- would be gone and you'd be left with Ant, Clark, DDV and whatever you could get from moving Naz or Randle. Which then depletes the front court which was a real strength of theirs the last few years.