RealGM

Cleveland trade: Garland
Cleveland receive: Avdija, Huerter, Vezenkov

Sacramento trade: Huerter, Vezenkov, 13
Sacramento receive: Kuzma

Washington trade: Avdija, Kuzma
Washington receive: Garland, 13

Why for Cleveland: Add a long term starter at SF for Garland
Why for Sacramento: upgrade forward spot
Why for Washington: likely drafting Sarr with the rumors of risacher working out w/ ATL and SAS, and Garland will help ALOT with Sarr's development. get a late lotto pick for Kuzma to ensure they stay bad enough to get high picks next couple seasons

can sub out huerter w/ barnes if people prefer, add 2nds as needed etc

I have this as rather too good for Washington. But admittedly I'm just not sold that Deni is a 40% shooter for real since he's only done the once and on very low volume. And I know Nate cites some end of season counting totals, but someone puts up stats even on bad teams. I need more evidence before thinking he's worth more than Garland.

Texas Chuck wrote:I have this as rather too good for Washington. But admittedly I'm just not sold that Deni is a 40% shooter for real since he's only done the once and on very low volume. And I know Nate cites some end of season counting totals, but someone puts up stats even on bad teams. I need more evidence before thinking he's worth more than Garland.

i debated internally if washington needs to give 26 as well... reread your thread and noticed there was mixed opinions about kuzma +/- 26 or not for 13.

I am curious if the board thinks avdija or garland is worth mroe though, will add a poll. i just think positionally the both fit the other team much better

Avdija scoring like he showed he can last year is the more valuable piece. Even if his shooting goes down to 35% from 3, he is still quite a valuable defensive piece. I don't think I would do it for Garland, who I like, but I like Avdija's game better.

I would do Kuzma to Sacramento for #13 and Huerter unless someone offered me more. I think Kuzma can aid a win now team and that would force more responsibility on the other Wiz starters to help them develop. Whether I would add #26 would depend on who was there at 13.

Think Sac is owed 26 here. Swap Huerter for Barnes as needed.

I firmly believe that it would take more than Deni is worth to get the Wizards to trade him. It does not follow that he's worth what it would take to get him.

I don't really see Garland v. Deni as debatable. One of them has shot well for a couple of months. One of them is a proven impact player coming off a tough season when he was seriously injured

I like the thought of getting Deni to Cleveland, but not with one of the core 4 outbound. Trades like this would leave Cleveland one Mitchell injury away from having Craig Porter Jr. as the starting PG...

mcfly1204 wrote:I like the thought of getting Deni to Cleveland, but not with one of the core 4 outbound. Trades like this would leave Cleveland one Mitchell injury away from having Craig Porter Jr. as the starting PG...

Okoro shot better than Deni from 3 last season on roughly the same number of attempts. They're also from the same draft. I think Deni has a better toolkit and higher ceiling than Okoro, but he's the skinniest guy at fat camp playing on the Wizards right now.

jbk1234 wrote:

mcfly1204 wrote:I like the thought of getting Deni to Cleveland, but not with one of the core 4 outbound. Trades like this would leave Cleveland one Mitchell injury away from having Craig Porter Jr. as the starting PG...

Okoro shot better than Deni from 3 last season on roughly the same number of attempts. They're also from the same draft. I think Deni has a better toolkit and higher ceiling than Okoro, but he's the skinniest guy at fat camp playing on the Wizards right now.

I'm inclined to agree, I see him as a potential Markkanen light in Cleveland. However, he's cost-controlled for multiple years, and Washington really has no reason to move him without a premium asset coming back.

Washington says no to the original deal. The defense is already pourous, and losing Deni, the best defender on the team, would make it even worse. Pass.

The Kuzma part of the trade is fine for Washington. Subtract Cleveland from this and you got something.

Narrow miss for CLE in my perspective. Like the idea of adding Avdija but the money makes it tough to get a balanced deal for Garland (who is legitimately more valuable). I don't think this one gets there.

LightTheBeam wrote:Think Sac is owed 26 here. Swap Huerter for Barnes as needed.

This part.

We are picking up the tab for the difference between Garland and Deni. The 26 should be coming to Sac and Barnes should be going out with Vezenkov not Huerter.

I’ve been pretty firmly against #13 for Kuzma as well as #13 for Kuzma/#26. I don’t think Kuzma holds that type of value considering his scoring inefficiency, being a career .337 3P% shooter, and not being a standout defender.

Texas Chuck wrote:I have this as rather too good for Washington. But admittedly I'm just not sold that Deni is a 40% shooter for real since he's only done the once and on very low volume. And I know Nate cites some end of season counting totals, but someone puts up stats even on bad teams. I need more evidence before thinking he's worth more than Garland.

I think Avdija is better than Garland because big wings who defend are more playable late in a playoff run than diminutive guards with defensive issues. But let's just assume that Garland is slightly better than Avdija for the purposes of this analysis.

The MASSIVE difference between the two is contract. Avdija will be paid a total of $54M over the next 4 years. Garland is going to cost $162M! That's a difference of $27M a year! Would you rather have Garland or Deni AND a $27M-a-year player?

Deni is also a year younger than Garland and still clearly in an upswing. Statistically, Garland's production plateaued a year ago and has even declined a bit, though that is partially explained by sharing the court with Mitchell.

Garland also has durability issues, missing an average of 17 games a season for the past 3 seasons. Deni has missed a grand total of 11 games in the last 3 years combined (and 3 of those missed games were at the end of the 2022-23 season when he could have played but the team shut him down because they were tanking).

But at least this is a real offer for Deni. Garland is a good NBA player who even snuck into an All-Star game once. This is a heck of a lot better than the crap offers we saw 2 weeks ago where people thought Deni could be had with the #9 pick in this draft, or with two late future FRP's.

I would politely turn down this deal from Washington's perspective, but at least it's not an insulting proposal. It's the type of deal that might make sense if Washington had a significant positional imbalance and needed to trade a forward for a guard. But since the Wizards lack any such motivations to push for such a move, I'd rather stick with Deni and see how he develops further.

Deni and Garland are in different tiers, what are you discussing here?

nate33 wrote:

Texas Chuck wrote:I have this as rather too good for Washington. But admittedly I'm just not sold that Deni is a 40% shooter for real since he's only done the once and on very low volume. And I know Nate cites some end of season counting totals, but someone puts up stats even on bad teams. I need more evidence before thinking he's worth more than Garland.

I think Avdija is better than Garland because big wings who defend are more playable late in a playoff run than diminutive guards with defensive issues. But let's just assume that Garland is slightly better than Avdija for the purposes of this analysis.

The MASSIVE difference between the two is contract. Avdija will be paid a total of $54M over the next 4 years. Garland is going to cost $162M! That's a difference of $27M a year! Would you rather have Garland or Deni AND a $27M-a-year player?

Deni is also a year younger than Garland and still clearly in an upswing. Statistically, Garland's production plateaued a year ago and has even declined a bit, though that is partially explained by sharing the court with Mitchell.

Garland also has durability issues, missing an average of 17 games a season for the past 3 seasons. Deni has missed a grand total of 11 games in the last 3 years combined (and 3 of those missed games were at the end of the 2022-23 season when he could have played but the team shut him down because they were tanking).

But at least this is a real offer for Deni. Garland is a good NBA player who even snuck into an All-Star game once. This is a heck of a lot better than the crap offers we saw 2 weeks ago where people thought Deni could be had with the #9 pick in this draft, or with two late future FRP's.

I would politely turn down this deal from Washington's perspective, but at least it's not an insulting proposal. It's the type of deal that might make sense if Washington had a significant positional imbalance and needed to trade a forward for a guard. But since the Wizards lack any such motivations to push for such a move, I'd rather stick with Deni and see how he develops further.

The Cavs lost Game 4 to the Celtics by 7 points. They were without Mitchell and in desperate need of offense. Garland dropped 30 points. Okoro, who is from Deni's draft and shoots better from 3 than Deni, scored 2 points. Guess which one was more playable?

This is silly. You're not getting to the playoffs, let alone competing in them, without putting the ball in the hoop.

Easy no for Cleveland. I have no idea how good Deni is. His stats aren’t great when you consider how awful the Wizards have been.

jbk1234 wrote:The Cavs lost Game 4 to the Celtics by 7 points. They were without Mitchell and in desperate need of offense. Garland dropped 30 points.

Not really that impressive. It took him 28 shot attempts to get those 30 points. And in the next game, he went 4-17. So in the two games without Mitchell, he averaged 20.5 points of a TS% of .444. That encapsulates the issue with Garland perfectly. He is a good scorer, but not a number 1 guy. He is a number 2 guy. But if you're only a number 2 guy, you really need to be a breakeven defender or plus defender (because most #1 guys are also bad defenders). Garland is a minus defender.

Deni can't be a primary option scorer, but in that situation, I'd expect Deni to average about 14-15 points while also pulling down 10 boards, dishing out 4 assists, and being the team's best defender. Which is more valuable? Good all around play or poor efficiency volume scoring with bad defense?

jbk1234 wrote:Okoro, who is from Deni's draft and shoots better from 3 than Deni, scored 2 points. Guess which one was more playable?

That's because Okoro has no other offensive game other than catch-and-shoot 3's. Deni has developed a very good dribble drive game and can very efficiently attack a closeout, run secondary pick and roll or post a mismatch. Deni averaged 19 points a game throughout the second-half of the season on a TS% of .600.

nate33 wrote:

jbk1234 wrote:The Cavs lost Game 4 to the Celtics by 7 points. They were without Mitchell and in desperate need of offense. Garland dropped 30 points.

Not really that impressive. It took him 28 shot attempts to get those 30 points. And in the next game, he went 4-17. So in the two games without Mitchell, he averaged 20.5 points of a TS% of .444. That encapsulates the issue with Garland perfectly. He is a good scorer, but not a number 1 guy. He is a number 2 guy. But if you're only a number 2 guy, you really need to be a breakeven defender or plus defender (because most #1 guys are also bad defenders). Garland is a minus defender.

Deni can't be a primary option scorer, but in that situation, I'd expect Deni to average about 14-15 points while also pulling down 10 boards, dishing out 4 assists, and being the team's best defender. Which is more valuable? Good all around play or poor efficiency scoring with bad defense?

jbk1234 wrote:Okoro, who is from Deni's draft and shoots better from 3 than Deni, scored 2 points. Guess which one was more playable?

That's because Okoro has no other offensive game other than catch-and-shoot 3's. Deni has developed a very good dribble drive game and can very efficiently attack a closeout, run secondary pick and roll or post a mismatch. Deni averaged 19 points a game throughout the second-half of the season on a TS% of .600.

You could give Deni 28 shots against the Celtics in the playoffs, with Strus as the only other perimeter threat on the floor, and he wouldn't sniff 30. I suspect you could give him 48 shots and he couldn't get there. I get that Wizrads fans are high on Deni. I understand why, but this is silly.

jbk1234 wrote:
You could give Deni 28 shots against the Celtics in the playoffs, with Strus as the only other perimeter threat on the floor, and he wouldn't sniff 30. I suspect you could give him 48 shots and he couldn't get there. I get that Wizrads fans are high on Deni. I understand why, but this is silly.

One reason why some of us have liked Avdija even as a rookie is that he WON'T take the stupid heat check shots, if anything he's too prone to pass rather than go Kobe. It limits him as a primary scorer but if he ever got 28 shots, it's quite probable that he's over 30 points even if he loses a bit of efficiency. If somehow he got 48, he's over 50 pts.

Jordan Poole, different story of course.