RealGM

Scenario: Donovan Mitchell takes his max extension from Cleveland after winning a playoff series, Cleveland looks to balance their roster. New Orleans can't get over the hump against one of the top ~5 teams in the west and look to retool a bit. The Lakers do nothing in the playoffs, and want to gear up for one last run with LeBron.

Lakers trade Jarred Vanderbilt, D'Angelo Russell, Gabe Vincent, 2025 1st, 2029 1st, 2031 1st, 1st round swaps to NOP in 2028 and 2030
Lakers receive Darius Garland
The Lakers get that star PG they're looking for and make a run with Garland/Reaves/LeBron/Rui/AD. no idea what the bench looks like in this situation, but that's an annual occurrence with this team.

Cavaliers trade Darius Garland, Caris LeVert
Cavaliers receive Brandon Ingram, Jarred Vanderbilt, Gabe Vincent
The Cavs balance their roster in a big way. One more bench guard and big to be added with the TPMLE and their late 1st this year, but things are looking real good with a rotation of Mitchell/Strus/Ingram/Mobley/Allen + Vincent/Niang/Vando/Wade

Pelicans trade Brandon Ingram
Pelicans receive 2025 LAL 1st, LAL 2028 1st swap, LAL 2029 1st, LAL 2030 1st swap, LAL 2031 1st, Russell, LeVert
The Pels start to retool, focusing their attention on their younger core with Zion, Murphy, Herb, Hawkins, etc and swing for a bunch of distant future picks, betting against the future of a team that is completely going for broke in the short term.

If the Pels do this, I'll be absolutely shocked. I don't know why they'd be moving away from Ingram in the first place. If anything, Zion's gotta go if you ask me.

I mean the implicit premise here is that the Cavs can't advance beyond the second round DUE to the Garland/Mitchell backcourt. That was not the reason the Cavs lost to the Knicks. In fact, Garland was primarily responsible for their only win and came very close to evening up that series in Game 4.

The other implicit premise is that the Pelicans wouldn't prefer Garland over the Lakers package. I'm dubious.

All of that aside, Ingram would have to extend with the Pelicans and then the parties could revisit the discussions once he was trade eligible. In any case, the Lakers wouldn't get away with dumping Vincent's deal on the Cavs given the fact the Cavs would already be committing themselves to a full vet max with Ingram.

Ingram is only 1 year older than Herb Jones.

Pelicans have all of their own picks, Lakers pick, couple Bucks picks and couple Bucks swaps, if anything, Pels should be going for an all-in move and not trade their guys for more late 1st rounders.

Cavs need more value here, probably starts with switching Vanderbilt with Rui.

Throw in 1 more protected first and I'd trade Garland to LA straight up for Rui, Russell, Hayes, and all those picks

bgrep14 wrote:Throw in 1 more protected first and I'd trade Garland to LA straight up for Rui, Russell, Hayes, and all those picks

Why does Mitchell re-sign if that's what the Cavs are going to do?

Cavs need a wing, Pels need a long-term PG. Think they just cut out the Lakers

Ingram just doesn't excite me, especially if he's still an expiring in this scenario. I agree with switching Vanderbilt and Rui, but it still doesn't explain why we want to move Garland,locked up for the near future, who WANTS to be in Cleveland, for an expiring Ingram, who probably doesn't care to stick around long-term...

Darius Garland isn't the guy for Lakers to blow their load on like this, IMO so as a Lakers fan, I say no but I guess that's predicted on my feelings towards Garland short and long term.

Also - the irony they could have drafted him 4th, waited a year to sign AD and not mortgaged their future to end up with a LBJ, AD, DG top 3 core.

JB2 wrote:Darius Garland isn't the guy for Lakers to blow their load on like this, IMO so as a Lakers fan, I say no but I guess that's predicted on my feelings towards Garland short and long term.

Also - the irony they could have drafted him 4th, waited a year to sign AD and not mortgaged their future to end up with a LBJ, AD, DG top 3 core.

Yup this package is ridiculous for Garland or I am vastly underrating him

Dlo rates out better this year even. Garland needs a bigger 2 guard next to him seems like

Targets to blow all or most assets should be Mitchell, Lauri, or Trae. Not super realistic unless they list a few teams. Mitchell is the most realistic since he would have 1 year left

Then the tier below them is Kyrie, Bridges, BI, Garland?

Kyrie I think is an option if Dallas fails. He is better than everyone in this tier and could argue hes closer to the tier above. But he has injry concerns and potential extra issues/drame he brings
Bridges could be available or maybe BKN pushes in their chips and builds with him
I think NOLA keeps BI and I dont see them dealing with us while they own our picks realistically. Also a meh fit, not great off ball
How much is it worth moving assets to go from Dlo to Garland tbh? We still lack a good defensive athletic guard

Then its another tier below with guys like DJM, Lavine
DJM is nice, but a tier below most of these guys
Lavine can be in the tier above, but injury concerns and contract dragged him down

Don’t Pels just deal with Cavs direct?


Ingram for Garland?

Looks like people are indeed underrating Garland in this thread. He missed a month and a half of games, but appears to be rounding back into form. We're talking about a 24 year old All-Star guard who can put up 20+ on good percentages while also being able to run your offense as a legitimate PG.

Lakers would be cut out in this scenario. The problem with Ingram is that he is a free agent soon. Garland is locked up for 4 more years.

I don’t see NOP not taking the 2025 first over the 2024 first, so LAL isn’t going to have the 2025 to offer.. they’re going to have a mid teens (if they make the playoffs) first in a not so exciting draft.

And NOP cuts LAL out anyways.

If Mitchell extends and Cleveland wants to retool, I’d say the deal is Murphy and Jones, with the LAL pick and whatever salary matching necessary.. Finger math says a Caris/CJM swap keeps it pretty even.. You could play Mitchell/CJM together for some minutes and it is a declining contract. though adding a third team probably.

First, Mitchell would have to re-sign. Then CLE would have to consider this.

jbk1234 wrote:I mean the implicit premise here is that the Cavs can't advance beyond the second round DUE to the Garland/Mitchell backcourt. That was not the reason the Cavs lost to the Knicks.

It was one of them. Allen wasn't constantly out of rebounding position just because he's stupid or something, lol.

tidho wrote:First, Mitchell would have to re-sign. Then CLE would have to consider this.

jbk1234 wrote:I mean the implicit premise here is that the Cavs can't advance beyond the second round DUE to the Garland/Mitchell backcourt. That was not the reason the Cavs lost to the Knicks.

It was one of them. Allen wasn't constantly out of rebounding position just because he's stupid or something, lol.

The Cavs defense must've been really bad last postseason

jbk1234 wrote:I mean the implicit premise here is that the Cavs can't advance beyond the second round DUE to the Garland/Mitchell backcourt.

A lot of NBA analysts, media and many posters on this forum think this way, me included. The cavs simply look better with Mitchell running the point, and the defense with Mitchell/Garland is an issue. Whether it’s Ingram, Bridges, Wagner or whoever, trading Garland for a big shooting/creating wing makes a ton of sense.

Having said that, I don’t love the fit of Ingram on the cavs. He’s not a willing spot up shooter and I’m not sure the spacing works with Mobley/Allan. A Bridges or Franz Wagner might make more sense.

The Delta between Garland and DLo doesn't seem to be Vandy, 3 picks and two swaps imo