RealGM

Alright so the mission here is pretty well defined: replace Darius Garland for a big 2/3.

Ideally, this person is a good defender, because Mitchell isn’t known for his lockdown defense.


Garland is 24 yo, and locked for another 4 years. That should make him attractive to both rebuilding and playoff teams.


What you got?

Kawhi?

Guys needs to be the primary ball handler but isn't good enough to be a teams engine.

Might be able to make a case he is worth his contract in a vacuum, but nearly impossible to justify it on a team serious about winning.

LarsV8 wrote:Guys needs to be the primary ball handler but isn't good enough to be a teams engine.

Might be able to make a case he is worth his contract in a vacuum, but nearly impossible to justify it on a team serious about winning.

The Cavs became a winning team when they gave Garland the keys to offense and haven't had a losing season since. He carried the team the season before Mitchell got here.

Midseason trade:

KCP, Howard (or Black), couple picks

Garland and LeVert

For

Kuzma and Poole

Allen / Wade
Mobley / Niang
Kuzma / Strus
Okoro / Poole
Mitchell / Tyson

Find a new home for Darius Garland in Cleveland, perhaps? Because the Cavs aren't trading him.

Brooklyn. Cam Johnson+

Garland for CamJ+DFS

Garland for Ingram

Garland for Sochan+Vassell

jazzfan1971 wrote:Kawhi?

Sold lol can even throw in Niang to make contracts work.

Rui, Reaves, Knecht, Vincent, and Wood for Garland, Niang, and Jerome

I think Garland has a lot more value than some here think.

But do think the four should be broken up. Think with the current group you seem to want to stagger the two bigs some and/or the guards some.

And that just feels like a weird core to have in 12 months once they’re no longer cheap..

Whether that’s Allen or Garland, I don’t know. But maybe it’s both.

It can wait until midseason or next offseason.

Just don’t let Okoro walk (or play on QO) if you probably end up needing a 3/d wing… Dump Niang and pay Okoro.. or trade Caris for a cheaper option..

bgrep14 wrote:Rui, Reaves, Knecht, Vincent, and Wood for Garland, Niang, and Jerome

If the Cavs were willing to move Garland for that type of return, he'd already be gone. The Cavs knew that they'd be giving Mobley a max extension when they decided against trading Garland. The Mobley deal isn't the catalyst people think it is.

I am sure he can afford a better real-estate agent than any of us. Surprisingly Cleveland has some nice areas.
I don’t really get this perceived need to move him.
If the right deal comes along then OK, but I don’t don’t see a need to actively shop him.

If they were to trade him I don’t think it’s for a bunch of bench guys or lesser pieces. It needs to be a good similar quality player that compliments the Cavs team. Hard to find a big wing out there that another team is willing to part with…Ingram makes sense, but I can’t think of much else.

Garland to DET
Ingram, Stewart, Sasser to CLE
Allen + to NOP

I think BI for Garland has always made too much sense. Cavs can’t take on BI with Garlands contract on the books, but by swapping them out they get a secondary ball handler and creator that can better fit in with Mitchell. Cavs would now still have a guy that can generate offense during the non Mitchell minutes but avoid the two small guard closing situation they have currently.

Problem on the flip side is the size of Garlands deal. Pels for example wouldn’t have wanted that money and certainly don’t now with Murray. And there just aren’t a lot of teams in need of a PG so the market is a bit limited.

But in the end, a three team deal sending Garland out and Ingram in has always made sense to me.

brackdan70 wrote:I am sure he can afford a better real-estate agent than any of us. Surprisingly Cleveland has some nice areas.
I don’t really get this perceived need to move him.
If the right deal comes along then OK, but I don’t don’t see a need to actively shop him.

Because the Cavs don't have enough size to compete in the postseason and need Mitchell to play PG to actually contend.

If the Cavs just want to lose in the first and second round every year intentionally... I mean, that's fine I guess? Weird, but fine.

But if they actually want a good shot of getting to the ECF, they need to trade Garland for a wing who can defend and shoot.

Jon1798 wrote:I think BI for Garland has always made too much sense. Cavs can’t take on BI with Garlands contract on the books, but by swapping them out they get a secondary ball handler and creator that can better fit in with Mitchell. Cavs would now still have a guy that can generate offense during the non Mitchell minutes but avoid the two small guard closing situation they have currently.

Problem on the flip side is the size of Garlands deal. Pels for example wouldn’t have wanted that money and certainly don’t now with Murray. And there just aren’t a lot of teams in need of a PG so the market is a bit limited.

But in the end, a three team deal sending Garland out and Ingram in has always made sense to me.

The Cavs, like every other team in the NBA apparently, don't want Ingram on a $50M per extension and Ingram isn't budging off that number. They've as much as said that publicly through Fedor.

Garland and Allen for Ingram and Herb Jones? Cavs has any picks? They could try to trade Levert+ m1sr for Cam Johnson too.
Mitchell
Ingram
Jones
Cam Johnson
Mobley