Cavs & Bulls

[JJ_PR]

Cavs get: Patrick Williams, Kevin Huerter, Jalen Smith, Dalen Terry, 12th pick, '26, '28 and '30 unprotected firsts
Bulls get: Donovan Mitchell, Max Strus and Dean Wade

Why?
Cavs need to move Mitchell if they want to win, when the games matter, he goes into hero ball.
Patrick Williams still has a chance to breakout, and a change of scenery might help.
Huerter has interesting tools like size, athleticism and shooting.
Jalen Smith gives us a solid back-up big.
We also save $18.5m

Bulls get a superstar for a reasonable price, and they also get a 3-point specialist and a stretch 4.

[Donkedave]

Just a no here.

[tidho]

This one will be popular, lol.

If CLE is going to trade Mitchell their needs to be a centerpiece player coming back. The value might collectively be here given how those picks could play out, but none of the players back are even locks to be starters on CLE.

[jbk1234]

Everyone on this board keeps telling you that Patrick Williams has negative trade value and you can't stop, won't stop.

[JJ_PR]

Everyone on this board keeps telling you that Patrick Williams has negative trade value and you can't stop, won't stop.

A change of scenery might help him. He has the tools; our training staff could do wonders for him. His contract isn't all that bad.

I just have this weird feeling that Williams is going to improve dramatically once he gets traded.

[jbk1234]

Everyone on this board keeps telling you that Patrick Williams has negative trade value and you can't stop, won't stop.

A change of scenery might help him. He has the tools; our training staff could do wonders for him. His contract isn't all that bad.

I just have this weird feeling that Williams is going to improve dramatically once he gets traded.

Assuming all that's true, which I don't agree with at all, he presently has negative trade value. You also thought we should trade real assets for Okeke and we picked him up of the waiver wire.

[axeman23]

This one will be popular, lol.

If CLE is going to trade Mitchell their needs to be a centerpiece player coming back. The value might collectively be here given how those picks could play out, but none of the players back are even locks to be starters on CLE.

I'd like Demin or Jaku with the 12 pick, but yeah, that can't be your biggest get from a Mitchell trade.

[Yenrallik1111]

Cavs get: Patrick Williams, Kevin Huerter, Jalen Smith, Dalen Terry, 12th pick, '26, '28 and '30 unprotected firsts
Bulls get: Donovan Mitchell, Max Strus and Dean Wade

Why?
Cavs need to move Mitchell if they want to win, when the games matter, he goes into hero ball.
Patrick Williams still has a chance to breakout, and a change of scenery might help.
Huerter has interesting tools like size, athleticism and shooting.
Jalen Smith gives us a solid back-up big.
We also save $18.5m

Bulls get a superstar for a reasonable price, and they also get a 3-point specialist and a stretch 4.

The Cavs need to move Mitchell to win?? So how do you think the bulls can with the roster they have to put around him. Also, that sounds quite odd given the cavs season led by him. Maybe some changes need to be made, but I can't see that being it. They are not in rebuild mode, so all that draft capital, while nice, doesn't seem like a priority. Then, from what I am reading your infatuation with Pat Williams shows a bias.

[ChettheJet]

How close to absolutely no chance in ehll do you think this is. You start with a bizarre reasoning and go off the rails from there

[toooskies]

Cavs get: Patrick Williams, Kevin Huerter, Jalen Smith, Dalen Terry, 12th pick, '26, '28 and '30 unprotected firsts
Bulls get: Donovan Mitchell, Max Strus and Dean Wade

Why?
Cavs need to move Mitchell if they want to win, when the games matter, he goes into hero ball.
Patrick Williams still has a chance to breakout, and a change of scenery might help.
Huerter has interesting tools like size, athleticism and shooting.
Jalen Smith gives us a solid back-up big.
We also save $18.5m

Bulls get a superstar for a reasonable price, and they also get a 3-point specialist and a stretch 4.

The Cavs need to move Mitchell to win?? So how do you think the bulls can with the roster they have to put around him. Also, that sounds quite odd given the cavs season led by him. Maybe some changes need to be made, but I can't see that being it. They are not in rebuild mode, so all that draft capital, while nice, doesn't seem like a priority. Then, from what I am reading your infatuation with Pat Williams shows a bias.

There is a belief among a portion of the fan base that two short guards can't work and it dominates the discussion around the Cavs, and it was very prominent last offseason. It has enough historical evidence that some people take it as a rule, and one of Garland or Mitchell need to go in order for the Cavs to reach the mountaintop-- and if they don't and still win a title, it would be in spite of that rule, and it would've been easier if we had traded Garland for, say, Brandon Ingram.

The reality on the ground is the Cavs have lost in the 2nd round the past two years because Garland and Mitchell have both been significantly affected by injuries in those playoff runs. Garland's jaw hurt him in 2024 and his toe was never right this year. Mitchell had knee tendinitis issues going into the playoffs and was ruled out of games 4 and 5 against the Celtics in 2024, and had rumored soft tissue injuries this year as well. Neither guy was close to 100%. Other injuries-- Allen and Wade in 2024, Mobley and Hunter in 2025-- also kept the team from producing.

And also, we simply lost our shooting touch this year. Garland, Mitchell, and Jerome all shot 25% or less from three against the Pacers and the team shot 29.4% overall from distance. That may have been partially due to injury, or it might have been playoff intensity, or it might have been just shooting luck, or it might have been the Pacers playing amazing defense. But even though all three of those guys were shooting poorly, they also insisted on calling their own number over and over again.

Now, you can believe that the talent balance needs to be adjusted-- fine. You can shift more offense to Mobley. You can wait for a still-young roster to mature a little more, which might involve moving Mitchell. But what you definitely don't do with a young team with 64 regular-season wins is trade its best player for bad salary and draft picks.

[mcfly1204]

Cavs get: Patrick Williams, Kevin Huerter, Jalen Smith, Dalen Terry, 12th pick, '26, '28 and '30 unprotected firsts
Bulls get: Donovan Mitchell, Max Strus and Dean Wade

Why?
Cavs need to move Mitchell if they want to win, when the games matter, he goes into hero ball.
Patrick Williams still has a chance to breakout, and a change of scenery might help.
Huerter has interesting tools like size, athleticism and shooting.
Jalen Smith gives us a solid back-up big.
We also save $18.5m

Bulls get a superstar for a reasonable price, and they also get a 3-point specialist and a stretch 4.

The Cavs need to move Mitchell to win?? So how do you think the bulls can with the roster they have to put around him. Also, that sounds quite odd given the cavs season led by him. Maybe some changes need to be made, but I can't see that being it. They are not in rebuild mode, so all that draft capital, while nice, doesn't seem like a priority. Then, from what I am reading your infatuation with Pat Williams shows a bias.

There is a belief among a portion of the fan base that two short guards can't work and it dominates the discussion around the Cavs, and it was very prominent last offseason. It has enough historical evidence that some people take it as a rule, and one of Garland or Mitchell need to go in order for the Cavs to reach the mountaintop-- and if they don't and still win a title, it would be in spite of that rule, and it would've been easier if we had traded Garland for, say, Brandon Ingram.

The reality on the ground is the Cavs have lost in the 2nd round the past two years because Garland and Mitchell have both been significantly affected by injuries in those playoff runs. Garland's jaw hurt him in 2024 and his toe was never right this year. Mitchell had knee tendinitis issues going into the playoffs and was ruled out of games 4 and 5 against the Celtics in 2024, and had rumored soft tissue injuries this year as well. Neither guy was close to 100%. Other injuries-- Allen and Wade in 2024, Mobley and Hunter in 2025-- also kept the team from producing.

And also, we simply lost our shooting touch this year. Garland, Mitchell, and Jerome all shot 25% or less from three against the Pacers and the team shot 29.4% overall from distance. That may have been partially due to injury, or it might have been playoff intensity, or it might have been just shooting luck, or it might have been the Pacers playing amazing defense. But even though all three of those guys were shooting poorly, they also insisted on calling their own number over and over again.

Now, you can believe that the talent balance needs to be adjusted-- fine. You can shift more offense to Mobley. You can wait for a still-young roster to mature a little more, which might involve moving Mitchell. But what you definitely don't do with a young team with 64 regular-season wins is trade its best player for bad salary and draft picks.

What I have found interesting is that the "you can't win with two smaller guards" narrative has almost evolved into "you can't win with Darius Garland because he can't switch onto bigger wings...".

[Yenrallik1111]

Cavs get: Patrick Williams, Kevin Huerter, Jalen Smith, Dalen Terry, 12th pick, '26, '28 and '30 unprotected firsts
Bulls get: Donovan Mitchell, Max Strus and Dean Wade

Why?
Cavs need to move Mitchell if they want to win, when the games matter, he goes into hero ball.
Patrick Williams still has a chance to breakout, and a change of scenery might help.
Huerter has interesting tools like size, athleticism and shooting.
Jalen Smith gives us a solid back-up big.
We also save $18.5m

Bulls get a superstar for a reasonable price, and they also get a 3-point specialist and a stretch 4.

The Cavs need to move Mitchell to win?? So how do you think the bulls can with the roster they have to put around him. Also, that sounds quite odd given the cavs season led by him. Maybe some changes need to be made, but I can't see that being it. They are not in rebuild mode, so all that draft capital, while nice, doesn't seem like a priority. Then, from what I am reading your infatuation with Pat Williams shows a bias.

There is a belief among a portion of the fan base that two short guards can't work and it dominates the discussion around the Cavs, and it was very prominent last offseason. It has enough historical evidence that some people take it as a rule, and one of Garland or Mitchell need to go in order for the Cavs to reach the mountaintop-- and if they don't and still win a title, it would be in spite of that rule, and it would've been easier if we had traded Garland for, say, Brandon Ingram.

The reality on the ground is the Cavs have lost in the 2nd round the past two years because Garland and Mitchell have both been significantly affected by injuries in those playoff runs. Garland's jaw hurt him in 2024 and his toe was never right this year. Mitchell had knee tendinitis issues going into the playoffs and was ruled out of games 4 and 5 against the Celtics in 2024, and had rumored soft tissue injuries this year as well. Neither guy was close to 100%. Other injuries-- Allen and Wade in 2024, Mobley and Hunter in 2025-- also kept the team from producing.

And also, we simply lost our shooting touch this year. Garland, Mitchell, and Jerome all shot 25% or less from three against the Pacers and the team shot 29.4% overall from distance. That may have been partially due to injury, or it might have been playoff intensity, or it might have been just shooting luck, or it might have been the Pacers playing amazing defense. But even though all three of those guys were shooting poorly, they also insisted on calling their own number over and over again.

Now, you can believe that the talent balance needs to be adjusted-- fine. You can shift more offense to Mobley. You can wait for a still-young roster to mature a little more, which might involve moving Mitchell. But what you definitely don't do with a young team with 64 regular-season wins is trade its best player for bad salary and draft picks.

The last sentence in your post is what I was thinking too. It sounds bad luck with injuries and performance were more the issue then the size of the back court. They do have a big front court to help on the defensive side of things if that is the concern. I would maybe consider a Garland for Holiday type deal if a change to the back court is considered necessary.

[toooskies]

The Cavs need to move Mitchell to win?? So how do you think the bulls can with the roster they have to put around him. Also, that sounds quite odd given the cavs season led by him. Maybe some changes need to be made, but I can't see that being it. They are not in rebuild mode, so all that draft capital, while nice, doesn't seem like a priority. Then, from what I am reading your infatuation with Pat Williams shows a bias.

There is a belief among a portion of the fan base that two short guards can't work and it dominates the discussion around the Cavs, and it was very prominent last offseason. It has enough historical evidence that some people take it as a rule, and one of Garland or Mitchell need to go in order for the Cavs to reach the mountaintop-- and if they don't and still win a title, it would be in spite of that rule, and it would've been easier if we had traded Garland for, say, Brandon Ingram.

The reality on the ground is the Cavs have lost in the 2nd round the past two years because Garland and Mitchell have both been significantly affected by injuries in those playoff runs. Garland's jaw hurt him in 2024 and his toe was never right this year. Mitchell had knee tendinitis issues going into the playoffs and was ruled out of games 4 and 5 against the Celtics in 2024, and had rumored soft tissue injuries this year as well. Neither guy was close to 100%. Other injuries-- Allen and Wade in 2024, Mobley and Hunter in 2025-- also kept the team from producing.

And also, we simply lost our shooting touch this year. Garland, Mitchell, and Jerome all shot 25% or less from three against the Pacers and the team shot 29.4% overall from distance. That may have been partially due to injury, or it might have been playoff intensity, or it might have been just shooting luck, or it might have been the Pacers playing amazing defense. But even though all three of those guys were shooting poorly, they also insisted on calling their own number over and over again.

Now, you can believe that the talent balance needs to be adjusted-- fine. You can shift more offense to Mobley. You can wait for a still-young roster to mature a little more, which might involve moving Mitchell. But what you definitely don't do with a young team with 64 regular-season wins is trade its best player for bad salary and draft picks.

What I have found interesting is that the "you can't win with two smaller guards" narrative has almost evolved into "you can't win with Darius Garland because he can't switch onto bigger wings...".

It's fun because it's the theoretical problem we were expecting against Boston that some people are still trying to solve. They're more attached to the narratives they were worried about than the actual basketball issues on the court.

[tidho]

What I have found interesting is that the "you can't win with two smaller guards" narrative has almost evolved into "you can't win with Darius Garland because he can't switch onto bigger wings...".

It's fun because it's the theoretical problem we were expecting against Boston that some people are still trying to solve. They're more attached to the narratives they were worried about than the actual basketball issues on the court.

The basketball issues on the court include the defensive liabilities created by the Garland/Sexton combination... my bad the Garland/Mitchell combination. Two small guards is a problem.

Not sure why it's being pinned solely on Darius, I suppose because of the two he underperformed more in the playoffs this year. The issue can be solved by moving either though, even though many have Mitchell in untouchable status for reasons beyond my comprehension.

Back to the specific OP deal. Based on the commentary it appears potential upside for Patrick Williams is being built into the trade. It's one thing for the potential of a rookie to be baked in - effectively trading for who the player will be in a year, for instance. When we're talking about busts that might improve in a new location, that's a motive for the buyer but not something they're going to pay for in the deal.

[toooskies]

What I have found interesting is that the "you can't win with two smaller guards" narrative has almost evolved into "you can't win with Darius Garland because he can't switch onto bigger wings...".

It's fun because it's the theoretical problem we were expecting against Boston that some people are still trying to solve. They're more attached to the narratives they were worried about than the actual basketball issues on the court.

The basketball issues on the court include the defensive liabilities created by the Garland/Sexton combination... my bad the Garland/Mitchell combination. Two small guards is a problem.

Not sure why it's being pinned solely on Darius, I suppose because of the two he underperformed more in the playoffs this year. The issue can be solved by moving either though, even though many have Mitchell in untouchable status for reasons beyond my comprehension.

Back to the specific OP deal. Based on the commentary it appears potential upside for Patrick Williams is being built into the trade. It's one thing for the potential of a rookie to be baked in - effectively trading for who the player will be in a year, for instance. When we're talking about busts that might improve in a new location, that's a motive for the buyer but not something they're going to pay for in the deal.

What on-court characteristics do small guards suffer from, particularly in the playoffs, and how did Mitchell suffer from them?

[tidho]

What on-court characteristics do small guards suffer from, particularly in the playoffs, and how did Mitchell suffer from them?

It's not any small guard, it's our small guards and the fact they we're pairing them together. some small guards are excellent defenders (like prime Chris Paul), ours are not. so playing two bad defenders together is a problem within itself. some like to downplay that being a problem but it gets obvious when one or both of our bigs has to chase Turner, Siakam, or Toppin out to the three-point line. it's simply a multiplier of opportunity for the opponent to create mismatches. then the obvious, easier to close on a small shooter, lack of rebounding, etc.

If a proposed deal gives us good value for one of them, then it doesn't really matter exactly why we're doing it. we should just do it.

[toooskies]

What on-court characteristics do small guards suffer from, particularly in the playoffs, and how did Mitchell suffer from them?

It's not any small guard, it's our small guards and the fact they we're pairing them together. some small guards are excellent defenders (like prime Chris Paul), ours are not. so playing two bad defenders together is a problem within itself. some like to downplay that being a problem but it gets obvious when one or both of our bigs has to chase Turner, Siakam, or Toppin out to the three-point line. it's simply a multiplier of opportunity for the opponent to create mismatches. then the obvious, easier to close on a small shooter, lack of rebounding, etc.

If a proposed deal gives us good value for one of them, then it doesn't really matter exactly why we're doing it. we should just do it.

So when you say "small guard" you mean vertical height. But how tall you are doesn't really matter on the basketball court except for sight lines.

What matters first defensively is reach. Mitchell's got a 6'10" wingspan which makes up for his below-average height for a SG. Mitchell can reach nearly as high vertically and wider horizontally as Derrick White can.

What matters next defensively is bulk. Mitchell's a brickhouse. Nobody's backing Mitchell into the paint or bumping him off his spot playing bully-ball.

And finally defensively, athleticism. Mitchell can jump out of the gym. He's arguably so strong athletically that he gives himself soft tissue injuries. When he's focusing on it he can rise up and grab contested rebounds from bigs, as he did multiple times against the Pacers.

Offensively, small guards often have trouble finishing at the rim or in traffic. Mitchell relentlessly got to the line against the Pacers and routinely finishes at the rim or draws fouls even when crowded by multiple bigs, even in the playoffs.

Another small guard issue is getting off 3-point shots. Mitchell has no problem getting these off volume-wise, although he might be slightly less accurate on his pull-ups in the postseason.

What I'm saying is that Mitchell, while short, is not a "small guard" in practice.

Garland on the other hand has typical small guard characteristics in all the above. So do Jerome and Merrill who both have negative wingspans to go with can't-dunk athleticism-- they are effectively shorter than their listed height. I consider the Cavs to have only one small guard on the court with Garland/Mitchell and two whenever they have two of Garland/Jerome/Merrill.

[axeman23]

Cavs get: Patrick Williams, Kevin Huerter, Jalen Smith, Dalen Terry, 12th pick, '26, '28 and '30 unprotected firsts
Bulls get: Donovan Mitchell, Max Strus and Dean Wade

Why?
Cavs need to move Mitchell if they want to win, when the games matter, he goes into hero ball.
Patrick Williams still has a chance to breakout, and a change of scenery might help.
Huerter has interesting tools like size, athleticism and shooting.
Jalen Smith gives us a solid back-up big.
We also save $18.5m

Bulls get a superstar for a reasonable price, and they also get a 3-point specialist and a stretch 4.

The Cavs need to move Mitchell to win?? So how do you think the bulls can with the roster they have to put around him. Also, that sounds quite odd given the cavs season led by him. Maybe some changes need to be made, but I can't see that being it. They are not in rebuild mode, so all that draft capital, while nice, doesn't seem like a priority. Then, from what I am reading your infatuation with Pat Williams shows a bias.

There is a belief among a portion of the fan base that two short guards can't work and it dominates the discussion around the Cavs, and it was very prominent last offseason. It has enough historical evidence that some people take it as a rule, and one of Garland or Mitchell need to go in order for the Cavs to reach the mountaintop-- and if they don't and still win a title, it would be in spite of that rule, and it would've been easier if we had traded Garland for, say, Brandon Ingram.

The reality on the ground is the Cavs have lost in the 2nd round the past two years because Garland and Mitchell have both been significantly affected by injuries in those playoff runs. Garland's jaw hurt him in 2024 and his toe was never right this year. Mitchell had knee tendinitis issues going into the playoffs and was ruled out of games 4 and 5 against the Celtics in 2024, and had rumored soft tissue injuries this year as well. Neither guy was close to 100%. Other injuries-- Allen and Wade in 2024, Mobley and Hunter in 2025-- also kept the team from producing.

And also, we simply lost our shooting touch this year. Garland, Mitchell, and Jerome all shot 25% or less from three against the Pacers and the team shot 29.4% overall from distance. That may have been partially due to injury, or it might have been playoff intensity, or it might have been just shooting luck, or it might have been the Pacers playing amazing defense. But even though all three of those guys were shooting poorly, they also insisted on calling their own number over and over again.

Now, you can believe that the talent balance needs to be adjusted-- fine. You can shift more offense to Mobley. You can wait for a still-young roster to mature a little more, which might involve moving Mitchell. But what you definitely don't do with a young team with 64 regular-season wins is trade its best player for bad salary and draft picks.

The problem wasn't that they "lost their shooting touch". It is that they (particularly Mitchell and Strus) spent so many shots trying to FIND it again, instead of feeding the hot hands, Mobley and Allen. And this has always been Mitchell's problem: He believes the bigs are just in the game to do the defensive work, get the rebound and get out of the way while he throws up another shot.

[Yenrallik1111]

The Cavs need to move Mitchell to win?? So how do you think the bulls can with the roster they have to put around him. Also, that sounds quite odd given the cavs season led by him. Maybe some changes need to be made, but I can't see that being it. They are not in rebuild mode, so all that draft capital, while nice, doesn't seem like a priority. Then, from what I am reading your infatuation with Pat Williams shows a bias.

There is a belief among a portion of the fan base that two short guards can't work and it dominates the discussion around the Cavs, and it was very prominent last offseason. It has enough historical evidence that some people take it as a rule, and one of Garland or Mitchell need to go in order for the Cavs to reach the mountaintop-- and if they don't and still win a title, it would be in spite of that rule, and it would've been easier if we had traded Garland for, say, Brandon Ingram.

The reality on the ground is the Cavs have lost in the 2nd round the past two years because Garland and Mitchell have both been significantly affected by injuries in those playoff runs. Garland's jaw hurt him in 2024 and his toe was never right this year. Mitchell had knee tendinitis issues going into the playoffs and was ruled out of games 4 and 5 against the Celtics in 2024, and had rumored soft tissue injuries this year as well. Neither guy was close to 100%. Other injuries-- Allen and Wade in 2024, Mobley and Hunter in 2025-- also kept the team from producing.

And also, we simply lost our shooting touch this year. Garland, Mitchell, and Jerome all shot 25% or less from three against the Pacers and the team shot 29.4% overall from distance. That may have been partially due to injury, or it might have been playoff intensity, or it might have been just shooting luck, or it might have been the Pacers playing amazing defense. But even though all three of those guys were shooting poorly, they also insisted on calling their own number over and over again.

Now, you can believe that the talent balance needs to be adjusted-- fine. You can shift more offense to Mobley. You can wait for a still-young roster to mature a little more, which might involve moving Mitchell. But what you definitely don't do with a young team with 64 regular-season wins is trade its best player for bad salary and draft picks.

The problem wasn't that they "lost their shooting touch". It is that they (particularly Mitchell and Strus) spent so many shots trying to FIND it again, instead of feeding the hot hands, Mobley and Allen. And this has always been Mitchell's problem: He believes the bigs are just in the game to do the defensive work, get the rebound and get out of the way while he throws up another shot.

That is a pretty simplified assessment. Your mind reading abilities are intriguing. I highly doubt that that is Mitchell's mindset. They had a brilliant season running the offense the way they did. That is on the coaching staff in the playoffs to make adjustments. Mitchell does not have that much power or control. Allen is a rim runner and maybe Mobley should be ready to take a step but, again, that is on the coaching staff.

[Dez]

No thanks on Donovan Mitchell, not giving up 4 unprotected 1sts.