RealGM

Nets get: Darius Garland
Nets send: Mikal Bridges, Dennis Schroder

Pelicans get: Jarrett Allen, Dennis Schroder, right to swap 2030 pick with 2030 Cavs pick
Pelicans send: Brandon Ingram

Cavs get: Mikal Bridges, Brandon Ingram
Cavs send: Darius Garland, Jarrett Allen, right to swap 2026 pick

Why for Nets: Get a guy who can actually create offense and has some upside

Why for Pelicans: Get a good center, save some money next year as Trey's extension kicks in, get a distant swap that never hurts. Dennis could also fill in minutes for CJ if CJ gets traded or Dennis could be moved later as he's an expiring.

Why for Cavs: Rebalance roster in a way that makes sense

I don't think either other team is getting enough from CLE to make either part of this happen.

Reference to sexual assault removed -- Do not post that again -- Chuck Most GMs will view Bridges > Garland as of 5/24/24.

He had a down year because he was fatigued. We all know this. They do too. When he is #2 or #3 next year and is not exhausted from playing 2000 days in a row he will be closer to what he was previously. He is not 40 years old.

The Nets are not moving that much for that little.

JKiddy wrote: Most GMs will view Bridges > Garland as of 5/24/24.

He had a down year because he was fatigued. We all know this. They do too. When he is #2 or #3 next year and is not exhausted from playing 2000 days in a row he will be closer to what he was previously. He is not 40 years old.

The Nets are not moving that much for that little.

Yeah, I really doubt this and I love Bridges as a #3 guy.

Garland still has #2 upside and the Nets have like no offensive creation at all and desperately need anyone who can create.

Garland has a devastatingly bad contract as of 2024. Might it change in 2025 or 2026 when he redeems himself tremendously? YES.

But, I think the Nets plan to bring in Mitchell or someone like that to be the #1 to Bridges #2/#2b. They are also freeing up massive money for 2025 and possibly 2026 for FA's who want to come to play in BK.

This would not help them achieve their goals.

JKiddy wrote:Garland has a devastatingly bad contract as of 2024. Might it change in 2025 or 2026 when he redeems himself tremendously? YES.

But, I think the Nets plan to bring in Mitchell or someone like that to be the #1 to Bridges #2/#2b. They are also freeing up massive money for 2025 and possibly 2026 for FA's who want to come to play in BK.

This would not help them achieve their goals.

We can take Cam Johnson off your hands too for LeVert and #20. Frees up that much more space in 2025, and his contract isn't exactly great.

JKiddy wrote:BK is getting raped here. Most GMs will view Bridges > Garland as of 5/24/24.

He had a down year because he was fatigued. We all know this. They do too. When he is #2 or #3 next year and is not exhausted from playing 2000 days in a row he will be closer to what he was previously. He is not 40 years old.

The Nets are not moving that much for that little.

Are you suggesting Bridges had a down year? If so, what's the basis for that claim? His performance in the 2023/2024 season was consistent with his past performance. While his stats slightly improved, his efficiency slightly declined, mainly due to increased responsibilities. Following his trade to Brooklyn, he had an impressive run of over 20 games, raising questions about his potential, but this past season he returned to his usual level. He's a reliable player with a favorable contract for the next two years. It's important to note that Bridges, at 28 by the start of training camp, isn't a young player with potential upside.

Garland, at just 24, experienced a downturn this year, yet he averaged 22 points and 8.5 assists per game in the two seasons prior. He's nearly four years younger than Bridges and has shown higher peaks in the past. There's a strong possibility that Darius could return to his previous level, and I believe there's a valid argument for him to surpass it.

tidho wrote:I don't think either other team is getting enough from CLE to make either part of this happen.

Has Ingram agreed to extend, and if so, at what number?

Also, what's the best non-Cavs offer the Pelicans are getting and from which team?

jbk1234 wrote:

tidho wrote:I don't think either other team is getting enough from CLE to make either part of this happen.

Has Ingram agreed to extend, and if so, at what number?

Also, what's the best non-Cavs offer the Pelicans are getting and from which team?

Not that i'm aware, and I wouldn't know.

as for this half of the deal - they're both not quite all-star level players and one happens to fit the mold of the most valuable archetype in the league. I trust that Ingram will be willing to sign somewhere. if he's not and insists on becoming a free agent than the equation changes, but as long as he's willing to sign someplace there's going to be a market because just about every team can use more 'hims'.

tidho wrote:

jbk1234 wrote:

tidho wrote:I don't think either other team is getting enough from CLE to make either part of this happen.

Has Ingram agreed to extend, and if so, at what number?

Also, what's the best non-Cavs offer the Pelicans are getting and from which team?

Not that i'm aware, and I wouldn't know.

as for this half of the deal - they're both not quite all-star level players and one happens to fit the mold of the most valuable archetype in the league. I trust that Ingram will be willing to sign somewhere. if he's not and insists on becoming a free agent than the equation changes, but as long as he's willing to sign someplace there's going to be a market because just about every team can use more 'hims'.

I no longer believe Garland is going to be traded, but for the sake of discussion, Garland makes 25% of the cap, limited to 8% raises with the cap going up 10% over the life of the contract. Assuming Ingram agrees to extend, if he insists on 30% of the cap, who owes?

jbk1234 wrote:

tidho wrote:

jbk1234 wrote:
Has Ingram agreed to extend, and if so, at what number?

Also, what's the best non-Cavs offer the Pelicans are getting and from which team?

Not that i'm aware, and I wouldn't know.

as for this half of the deal - they're both not quite all-star level players and one happens to fit the mold of the most valuable archetype in the league. I trust that Ingram will be willing to sign somewhere. if he's not and insists on becoming a free agent than the equation changes, but as long as he's willing to sign someplace there's going to be a market because just about every team can use more 'hims'.

I no longer believe Garland is going to be traded, but for the sake of discussion, Garland makes 25% of the cap, limited to 8% raises with the cap going up 10% over the life of the contract. Assuming Ingram agrees to extend, if he insists on 30% of the cap, who owes?

in this deal Garland is going for Bridges and Allen for Ingram, so i was talking Allen and Ingram. Ingram will obviously make more but I don't view that as much of a consideration - CLE would be paying tax starting next year anyway, and they aren't going to run out of money.

tidho wrote:

jbk1234 wrote:

tidho wrote:
Not that i'm aware, and I wouldn't know.

as for this half of the deal - they're both not quite all-star level players and one happens to fit the mold of the most valuable archetype in the league. I trust that Ingram will be willing to sign somewhere. if he's not and insists on becoming a free agent than the equation changes, but as long as he's willing to sign someplace there's going to be a market because just about every team can use more 'hims'.

I no longer believe Garland is going to be traded, but for the sake of discussion, Garland makes 25% of the cap, limited to 8% raises with the cap going up 10% over the life of the contract. Assuming Ingram agrees to extend, if he insists on 30% of the cap, who owes?

in this deal Garland is going for Bridges and Allen for Ingram, so i was talking Allen and Ingram. Ingram will obviously make more but I don't view that as much of a consideration - CLE would be paying tax starting next year anyway, and they aren't going to run out of money.

I promise you that whether Ingram is willing to extend, and for how much, will significantly impact his trade value, not just with the Cavs, but around the NBA.

So Cleveland just wants stuff for free.

Can't wait to look back at these topics after the real Garland/Allen trade happens...

No thanks from Brooklyn