RealGM

I think this would work, and help all 4 teams

ATL sends Murray to NO
ATL gets #8 and their '25 pick back, plus their '26 swap erased

NO sends BI to Clev
NO gets Murray

Clev sends Garland to SA
Clev gets BI

SA sends #8 to Atl and their '25 pick plus the '26 swap
SA gets Garland

ATL saves a bunch of $ and adds BPA at #8 (Carter?), and gets their pick back. They pick Sarr at #1
Young/Carter
Griffin/Bogs/Bufkin
Hunter/Bogs/Griffin
Johnson/Sarr/Okongwu
Capela/Sarr/Okongwu

NO balances out their team. BI might be a bit of a better player but is in a worse contract situation than Murray

Clev balances their team Mitchell/Struss/BI/Mobley/Allen is a VERY nice lineup.

SA gets a young PG to grow with. I think they should make a move for Risacher too, and they'd be set
Garland/Jones
Vassell/Branham/KJ
Risacher/KJ
Sochan/KJ
Wemby/Collins

Use #4 and the Chi '25 pick to move up to take Risacher, and Wash gets Clingon at #4

Thoughts?

I think this trade values Murray far too highly. And if San Antonio is foolish enough to give up what could well be three lottery picks, two of them in excellent drafts, for Garland, Cleveland happily takes that haul and cuts Atlanta out.

Ingram has to decide whether he's going to insist on a vet max extension, and if he will, he's unlikely to be the centerpiece of a Garland trade. If he'll come down and a deal gets done, I suspect the Pelicans just take Garland.

But you have the Spurs offering a package for Garland they wouldn't offer for Murray and Atlanta still getting that return.

jbk1234 wrote:Ingram has to decide whether he's going to insist on a vet max extension, and if he will, he's unlikely to be the centerpiece of a Garland trade. If he'll come down and a deal gets done, I suspect the Pelicans just take Garland.

But you have the Spurs offering a package for Garland they wouldn't offer for Murray and Atlanta still getting that return.

I figure Garland is younger and a better PG type for Wemby. Murray was already in SA, and I'm assuming no reunion.

Maybe the swap stays in SA, and ATL gets cap relief, #8 and one pick back

Spurs paying way too much.

I fee like this is over complicated. Why not just do Garland for Ingram straight up, why make it a 4 team deal

Presser wrote:I fee like this is over complicated. Why not just do Garland for Ingram straight up, why make it a 4 team deal

Good question
I figure Murray is a better fit on defense than CJ. Tough to run CJ/Garland as your backcourt

SA could use a real, young PG-and Garland fits there

Presser wrote:I fee like this is over complicated. Why not just do Garland for Ingram straight up, why make it a 4 team deal

CLE fans are hung up on Ingram's contract. Team's going to be over regardless, so I'm not sure it matters. Somehow if he takes $4M less than max though, everybody jumps on board.