RealGM

Cleveland gets: Brandon Ingram and Karl Anthony Towns
New Orleans gets: Jarrett Allen and Caris LeVert
Minnesota gets: Darius Garland

Why?
Cleveland adds better fitting pieces.
New Orleans gets their much needed big.
Minnesota shaves salary and gets their PG of the future.

Minnesota needs incentive to downgrade drastically. They no longer match-up well with either OKC or Denver, which pushes them down to the 4th best team in the West.

Colbinii wrote:Minnesota needs incentive to downgrade drastically. They no longer match-up well with either OKC or Denver, which pushes them down to the 4th best team in the West.

I don’t agree with that. Garland is a very good player. I don’t love the fit with Edwards, so not in my top 5 targets for Towns. I don’t see the downgrade you do.

I think the Wolves counter with
MIN: Garland, Herbert
NOP: Mobley, Okoro, Levert
CLE: Towns, Ingram

WinterSoldier wrote:I think the Wolves counter with
MIN: Garland, Herbert
NOP: Mobley, Okoro, Levert
CLE: Towns, Ingram

Um, I hope I am reading the wrong.

A) Towns isn’t worth Garland plus Herb. I wish. Just not.

B) Cavs would see Garland and Towns as close in value (because they are), 100% no way trade Mobley for expiring Ingram. Like not even close or within a conversation starter for them.

This should be an easy no for the Wolves. I think Towns for Garland is a pretty significant step down, and I really don't like Garland's fit in terms of usage and defense.

If I’m the Pels I’m trying to get Towns for ourselves

Wolveswin wrote:

WinterSoldier wrote:I think the Wolves counter with
MIN: Garland, Herbert
NOP: Mobley, Okoro, Levert
CLE: Towns, Ingram

Um, I hope I am reading the wrong.

A) Towns isn’t worth Garland plus Herb. I wish. Just not.

B) Cavs would see Garland and Towns as close in value (because they are), 100% no way trade Mobley for expiring Ingram. Like not even close or within a conversation starter for them.

Just to re-emphasize point B. Absolutely no way CLE would do this. None.

lordjeff05 wrote:If I’m the Pels I’m trying to get Towns for ourselves

If I'm the Cavs, I'm happily letting them.

jbk1234 wrote:

lordjeff05 wrote:If I’m the Pels I’m trying to get Towns for ourselves

If I'm the Cavs, I'm happily letting them.

I am biased of course, as is everyone here about there team, but that is wrong decision. Towns and Mobley would be amazing. Like the best pairing those two could find in all NBA. Towns with either Mitchell or Garland is amazing too. Both guards who need the lane opened up get the best shooting big man in NBA. Cavs are actually one of the best landing spots for Towns if traded.

Wolveswin wrote:

jbk1234 wrote:

lordjeff05 wrote:If I’m the Pels I’m trying to get Towns for ourselves

If I'm the Cavs, I'm happily letting them.

I am biased of course, as is everyone here about there team, but that is wrong decision. Towns and Mobley would be amazing. Like the best pairing those two could find in all NBA. Towns with either Mitchell or Garland is amazing too. Both guards who need the lane opened up get the best shooting big man in NBA. Cavs are actually one of the best landing spots for Towns if traded.

Agree with you, but also don't think MIN is going to follow up their success by dismantling.

The OP deal is the right idea, Garland/Allen out and Towns in, but Allen's value needs to be split by a third team with CLE and MIN getting something else back for it.

Swap out Ingram for McCollum.

ZionWembanyama wrote:Swap out Ingram for McCollum.

...and add Jones or Murphy.

JJ_PR wrote:Cleveland gets: Brandon Ingram and Karl Anthony Towns
New Orleans gets: Jarrett Allen and Caris LeVert
Minnesota gets: Darius Garland

Why?
Cleveland adds better fitting pieces.
New Orleans gets their much needed big.
Minnesota shaves salary and gets their PG of the future.

I'm always open for a discussion on Garland vs KAT from a trade value perspective and not everyone will see it the same way. The problem I would have for the Wolves is fit next year. With the 3 bigs they are generally able to mix and match any 2 together, so while its a surplus, its a very manageable one. But with Garland and Conley, I dont see how you could get away with playing both PG together in the playoffs for any meaningful minutes without getting killed on defense. Conley isn't great defensively anymore but hes smart and in the right positions and they do their best to hide him. But there's no way you could do that with Conley and Garland on the court. We've seen what happens when teams try and play 2 smaller guards in the playoffs. So the correction to that is what, now Conley's just a bench PG? Thats an expensive luxury at 10M for a backup PG, where you also now have traded away your big man depth and your primary scorer off the bench is in the starting lineup so your bench lacks thats scoring punch too. Even if this helps with longterm PG planning, I think the short-term roster construction limits the ceiling.

schaffy wrote:

JJ_PR wrote:Cleveland gets: Brandon Ingram and Karl Anthony Towns
New Orleans gets: Jarrett Allen and Caris LeVert
Minnesota gets: Darius Garland

Why?
Cleveland adds better fitting pieces.
New Orleans gets their much needed big.
Minnesota shaves salary and gets their PG of the future.

I'm always open for a discussion on Garland vs KAT from a trade value perspective and not everyone will see it the same way. The problem I would have for the Wolves is fit next year. With the 3 bigs they are generally able to mix and match any 2 together, so while its a surplus, its a very manageable one. But with Garland and Conley, I dont see how you could get away with playing both PG together in the playoffs for any meaningful minutes without getting killed on defense. Conley isn't great defensively anymore but hes smart and in the right positions and they do their best to hide him. But there's no way you could do that with Conley and Garland on the court. We've seen what happens when teams try and play 2 smaller guards in the playoffs. So the correction to that is what, now Conley's just a bench PG? Thats an expensive luxury at 10M for a backup PG, where you also now have traded away your big man depth and your primary scorer off the bench is in the starting lineup so your bench lacks thats scoring punch too. Even if this helps with longterm PG planning, I think the short-term roster construction limits the ceiling.

Just because you have three bigs that work really well together, doesn't mean you shouldn't trade one of them for a completely redundant small guard! - Koby Altman

tidho wrote:

schaffy wrote:

JJ_PR wrote:Cleveland gets: Brandon Ingram and Karl Anthony Towns
New Orleans gets: Jarrett Allen and Caris LeVert
Minnesota gets: Darius Garland

Why?
Cleveland adds better fitting pieces.
New Orleans gets their much needed big.
Minnesota shaves salary and gets their PG of the future.

I'm always open for a discussion on Garland vs KAT from a trade value perspective and not everyone will see it the same way. The problem I would have for the Wolves is fit next year. With the 3 bigs they are generally able to mix and match any 2 together, so while its a surplus, its a very manageable one. But with Garland and Conley, I dont see how you could get away with playing both PG together in the playoffs for any meaningful minutes without getting killed on defense. Conley isn't great defensively anymore but hes smart and in the right positions and they do their best to hide him. But there's no way you could do that with Conley and Garland on the court. We've seen what happens when teams try and play 2 smaller guards in the playoffs. So the correction to that is what, now Conley's just a bench PG? Thats an expensive luxury at 10M for a backup PG, where you also now have traded away your big man depth and your primary scorer off the bench is in the starting lineup so your bench lacks thats scoring punch too. Even if this helps with longterm PG planning, I think the short-term roster construction limits the ceiling.

Just because you have three bigs that work really well together, doesn't mean you shouldn't trade one of them for a completely redundant small guard! - Koby Altman

I want to give you a +1 and a -1 for that...

mcfly1204 wrote:

tidho wrote:Just because you have three bigs that work really well together, doesn't mean you shouldn't trade one of them for a completely redundant small guard! - Koby Altman

I want to give you a +1 and a -1 for that...

Completely fair.

Both KAT and Garland have gotten bad raps for a poor postseason, and even season in general. However, they both can be a huge positive for their team provided they and what they do well is a good FIT for the team. Right now KAT and Garland are poor fits for their team. KAT on the Cavs is perfect for both of them. Garland on Minn....not 100% sure of the fit with Edwards but I know he is 1000% better than a washed up Conley. I do think he is a decent fit as Edwards is a really good defender and he has Gobert behind him. Finally, Reid will get to play more and he has really shown his positive value and better fit than KAT. I would like to see a straight KAT for Garland trade....both sides probably think they need more, but.....its close in value and fit.

phraoh wrote:Both KAT and Garland have gotten bad raps for a poor postseason, and even season in general. However, they both can be a huge positive for their team provided they and what they do well is a good FIT for the team. Right now KAT and Garland are poor fits for their team. KAT on the Cavs is perfect for both of them. Garland on Minn....not 100% sure of the fit with Edwards but I know he is 1000% better than a washed up Conley. I do think he is a decent fit as Edwards is a really good defender and he has Gobert behind him. Finally, Reid will get to play more and he has really shown his positive value and better fit than KAT. I would like to see a straight KAT for Garland trade....both sides probably think they need more, but.....its close in value and fit.

KAT did not have a bad postseason he had a bad WCF, wolves don’t make the WCF with Garland rather than KAT imo.

MNRunLeft wrote:

phraoh wrote:Both KAT and Garland have gotten bad raps for a poor postseason, and even season in general. However, they both can be a huge positive for their team provided they and what they do well is a good FIT for the team. Right now KAT and Garland are poor fits for their team. KAT on the Cavs is perfect for both of them. Garland on Minn....not 100% sure of the fit with Edwards but I know he is 1000% better than a washed up Conley….

KAT did not have a bad postseason he had a bad WCF, wolves don’t make the WCF with Garland rather than KAT imo.

And Conley is far from “washed up.” He played 76 games last year, shot 44.2% 3P%, and provided direction and stability to a team that badly needed it.

Quick Conley story: When he was traded to MIN, he thought at his age, he’d just be bringing the ball up the floor, and standing in the corner. Chris Finch said, “No, we need everything you got,” and Conley said it revived his career. Finch wanted to rest him on the second night of back to backs, and Conley told him he was fine, and proved it with good play. He says that at his age, he knows how to play smart. He’s rarely driving into contact, or banging for rebounds with bigs - all he has to do is get through screens.

Announcers like to say Ant is the leader of this team, but if you ask Ant, he will tell you it’s Mike Conley. We don’t know how long he will be able to play, but MIN and Ant love him, and what he does for this team.