RealGM

Cavs Trade: Garland/Niang
NOP Trade: Ingram/Daniels/Nance/#21

Cavs: Bring in Ingram that balances the team a little more along with Daniels to be the back up point. Still have #20/#21 to make some moves to add talent to the bench or upgrade another starter. This would be contingent on Ingram signing an extension.
Mitchell/Strus/Ingram/Mobley/Allen
Daniels/Levert/Okoro/Wade/Nance

NOP:
Move in a different direction and upgrade the PG spot which also opens up a spot for Murphy in the starting line-up.
Would need follow up deal to move on from CJ and bring in a 5 in that deal (Stewart/WCJ type). Have plenty of picks to do so. Or maybe they sign JV again. Plenty of options.

Garland/Jones/Murphy/Zion/?? (JV or from CJ trade)
Alverado/Hawkins/Marshall/Niang/?

It's not terrible. I think Cleveland can do better though.

I think it has to be Jones or Murphy in any CLE deals to make it worth it.

mcfly1204 wrote:I think it has to be Jones or Murphy in any CLE deals to make it worth it.

considering those guys are the whole reason Ingram is available, that's probably not going to happen unless it's an insane bargain.

I like CJM and one of Jones/Trey for Garland so much more for both sides, but that idea has been killed..

I think Cleveland should take the OP if Ingram extends and move on if he doesn’t. I don’t think 21 would be included, Dyson is still a really nice prospect..

..only if Mitchell has extended

OxAndFox wrote:Cavs Trade: Garland/Niang
NOP Trade: Ingram/Daniels/Nance/#21

Cavs: Bring in Ingram that balances the team a little more along with Daniels to be the back up point. Still have #20/#21 to make some moves to add talent to the bench or upgrade another starter. This would be contingent on Ingram signing an extension.
Mitchell/Strus/Ingram/Mobley/Allen
Daniels/Levert/Okoro/Wade/Nance

NOP:
Move in a different direction and upgrade the PG spot which also opens up a spot for Murphy in the starting line-up.
Would need follow up deal to move on from CJ and bring in a 5 in that deal (Stewart/WCJ type). Have plenty of picks to do so. Or maybe they sign JV again. Plenty of options.

Garland/Jones/Murphy/Zion/?? (JV or from CJ trade)
Alverado/Hawkins/Marshall/Niang/?

I added to your trade the inclusion of the Knicks.
Niang instead goes to NYK. Niang is not going to play at NOP.
Knicks send Mitchell, DiVinny, Boggy to NOP
NOP sends McCollum, Hawkins to NYK.
NYK can resign OG and Hartenstein.

I’d do it from a Cleveland perspective if Mitchell resigns and LeBron isn’t coming back

One_and_Done wrote:It's not terrible. I think Cleveland can do better though.

mcfly1204 wrote:I think it has to be Jones or Murphy in any CLE deals to make it worth it.

Wtf am i reading here? There was milion trades on the board where Cavs trade Garland and reason is simple. He is not that good and he earns a lot of money.

How the **** can Cavs do better for a player that averages 18/6.5/2.5 on 44%FG and 37% 3P in RS and 15/6/4 on worse shooting in playoffs? If he is that good just keep him then.

Ingram is overrated too though.

Mrakar wrote:

One_and_Done wrote:It's not terrible. I think Cleveland can do better though.

mcfly1204 wrote:I think it has to be Jones or Murphy in any CLE deals to make it worth it.

Wtf am i reading here? There was milion trades on the board where Cavs trade Garland and reason is simple. He is not that good and he earns a lot of money.

How the **** can Cavs do better for a player that averages 18/6.5/2.5 on 44%FG and 37% 3P in RS and 15/6/4 on worse shooting in playoffs? If he is that good just keep him then.

The reason there are a million trades on the board is because Klutch put out a statement that Garland wants to be traded if Mitchell extends. If Mitchell doesn't extend, Garland will not be traded (he may not get his wish even if Mitchell does extend).

In terms of what he earns, if Ingram agrees to extend for 25% of the cap with his new team (what Garland earns), I think he's a real asset, but I don't think he's going to do that.

I mean, I still wouldn't do this deal as I want Mitchell gone instead. But the value is undeniably decent if, as JBK said, Ingram agreed to the 25% contract. Daniels still has some potential; I liked Nance in his time with us; the #21 is, if nothing else a cheap young body and trade-filler, and if i never had to watch Dad-bod Niang waddle up and down the court in our colours again, that would be a win in itself!

jayjaysee wrote:I like CJM and one of Jones/Trey for Garland so much more for both sides, but that idea has been killed..

I think Cleveland should take the OP if Ingram extends and move on if he doesn’t. I don’t think 21 would be included, Dyson is still a really nice prospect..

..only if Mitchell has extended

I thought about the CJM idea, but I concluded, right or wrong, that the only reason the Cavs would get off Garland is they don't believe in the 2 small guards.

Yes, I forgot to mention this is only if Mitchell extends. That is a pretty important detail I missed.

louc1970 wrote:

OxAndFox wrote:

I added to your trade the inclusion of the Knicks.
Niang instead goes to NYK. Niang is not going to play at NOP.
Knicks send Mitchell, DiVinny, Boggy to NOP
NOP sends McCollum, Hawkins to NYK.
NYK can resign OG and Hartenstein.

I don't think the Knicks do that though. Great idea, but I don't see them parting ways with Donte.
If it were Mitchell/Bogs for just CJM it would be better, but even then, how does CJM work with Brunson?

So this trade or a version of it might actually happen

This seems like pretty fair value for both. I think CLE would need to take it if offered - assuming Mitchell resigns. Not going to love watching the style of basketball a team with Mitchell and Ingram would play, but this would keep them in the second tier of contention.

tidho wrote:This seems like pretty fair value for both. I think CLE would need to take it if offered - assuming Mitchell resigns. Not going to love watching the style of basketball a team with Mitchell and Ingram would play, but this would keep them in the second tier of contention.

With all the doubts about Ingram's fit with the potential Mitchell-led Cavs and contract-- I wonder if it's better to get Ingram to a 3rd team (Kings) sending other players and picks to Cavs. Mccullom shouldn't be a main piece for Garland, but could be a nice 6th-man veteran professional replacement scorer who can accept coming off the bench, and he's more comfortable off-ball. Also, I hear he's from Ohio.

Ingram + Alvarado --> to SAC

H. Barnes + Daniels + McCullom + Nance + pick #13 --> to CLE

Garland + LeVert + Heurter + Davion + Niang + future SAC 1sts and swaps --> to NOP

YayBasketball wrote:

tidho wrote:This seems like pretty fair value for both. I think CLE would need to take it if offered - assuming Mitchell resigns. Not going to love watching the style of basketball a team with Mitchell and Ingram would play, but this would keep them in the second tier of contention.

With all the doubts about Ingram's fit with the potential Mitchell-led Cavs and contract-- I wonder if it's better to get Ingram to a 3rd team (Kings) sending other players and picks to Cavs. Mccullom shouldn't be a main piece for Garland, but could be a nice 6th-man veteran professional replacement scorer who can accept coming off the bench, and he's more comfortable off-ball. Also, I hear he's from Ohio.

Ingram + Alvarado --> to SAC

H. Barnes + Daniels + McCullom + Nance + pick #13 --> to CLE

Garland + LeVert + Heurter + Davion + Niang + future SAC 1sts and swaps --> to NOP

This is significantly worse for the Cavs. That package has, at best, nuetral trade value. They're not going to eat all that salary.

Cleveland would rather have Ingram than H. Barnes, but agree with earlier post....Cavs would need Murphy instead of the first round pick. To make it fair, and to match salaries, Cavs would have to put Levert (or Okoru, sign and trade) in the deal to match value and salary. And Niang would be out of the trade.

phraoh wrote:Cleveland would rather have Ingram than H. Barnes, but agree with earlier post....Cavs would need Murphy instead of the first round pick. To make it fair, and to match salaries, Cavs would have to put Levert (or Okoru, sign and trade) in the deal to match value and salary. And Niang would be out of the trade.

Why do they need Murphy?
I can't wait to see what the real trades are, everyone is extremely high on Cavs players for some reason. Our young guys seem to have the value of Russian soldiers.

ADMVP wrote:

phraoh wrote:Cleveland would rather have Ingram than H. Barnes, but agree with earlier post....Cavs would need Murphy instead of the first round pick. To make it fair, and to match salaries, Cavs would have to put Levert (or Okoru, sign and trade) in the deal to match value and salary. And Niang would be out of the trade.

Why do they need Murphy?
I can't wait to see what the real trades are, everyone is extremely high on Cavs players for some reason. Our young guys seem to have the value of Russian soldiers.

They "need him" because everyone needs him. They're not getting him, and a lot of CLE fans haven't caught up to that yet. The reason Ingram might be available is because NO is going with Murphy instead. Murphy isn't going to be made available.