RealGM

Cavs get: Shaedon Sharpe, Deni Avdija, Robert Williams and Rayan Rupert
Blazers get: Donovan Mitchell

Why?
Cavs add depth, size and athleticism.
Blazers get a superstar.

Blazers say no because Deni/Shae is already our 1a/1b option. Mitchell is far past our timeline. Thanks for the invitation tho!

I like Deni, but that's an awful return for the Cavs. The Blazer say yes and immediately flip Mitchell for twice what they paid to get him.

Why do the Cavs not want to be contenders anymore?

This one makes way more sense for Portland. It is a tough pill to swallow not having Deni WITH Mitchell, but I think I’d do it. Mitchell is the star upgrade Blazers would love at SG. Grant gets his starting position back with Deni gone. Portland would need to focus on getting better depth at F, but that is easier than landing a star. If only Cavs were blowing it up and would take a boat load of picks instead of Deni.

toooskies wrote:Why do the Cavs not want to be contenders anymore?

Deni and Sharpe is a great return for Mitchell and we're still contenders with them imo. I'm worried Mitchell will resort to hero ball again in crucial moments next year. We should've won game 5 against the Pacers, keep feeding the bigs. Does Mitchell acknowledge the importance of giving the ball to our bigs and letting them go to work?

The value is fine for PDX but I hate the idea of going back to 2 small guards.

Realistically, PDX is going to run with this squad in 25/26 - see how the kids develop and then once Dame is back in 26/27 potentially make a splash trade if his play level is somehow similar to pre achilles.

I have had enough of 6’3” and under pg, sg and sf to last a lifetime.

No more shrimps.

BlazersBroncos wrote:The value is fine for PDX but I hate the idea of going back to 2 small guards.

This was my biggest pause as well. I like the lineup with Jrue. Not so much with Dame. I’d still do it, and worst case we flip Mitchell if he can’t co-exist with Lillard.

JJ_PR wrote:

toooskies wrote:Why do the Cavs not want to be contenders anymore?

Deni and Sharpe is a great return for Mitchell and we're still contenders with them imo. I'm worried Mitchell will resort to hero ball again in crucial moments next year. We should've won game 5 against the Pacers, keep feeding the bigs. Does Mitchell acknowledge the importance of giving the ball to our bigs and letting them go to work?

Sharpe is in the last year of his rookie contract, shot .311 from 3 last season, and not only did the Blazers decline to extend him, they clogged their books with past-their-sell-by-date older guards. Mitchell is an all-nba guard.

As far as Game 5, you're spending too much time on RCF. Merrill was out, Strus was 0-8, Garland was trying to play on one foot, so was Mitchell, and Jerome didn't even see the floor until late in the 4th. Once the Pacers figured out the Cavs couldn't hit a jumper, that inside action went away. Trading Mitchell for Deni and Sharpe doesn't solve for that, it only compounds the problem.

JJ_PR wrote:

toooskies wrote:Why do the Cavs not want to be contenders anymore?

Deni and Sharpe is a great return for Mitchell and we're still contenders with them imo. I'm worried Mitchell will resort to hero ball again in crucial moments next year. We should've won game 5 against the Pacers, keep feeding the bigs. Does Mitchell acknowledge the importance of giving the ball to our bigs and letting them go to work?

Deni and Sharpe have zero playoff reps. They need to learn how to survive adjustments in the playoffs. You remove the leader of the team and hope Mobley suddenly turns into an alpha when, despite all his skills increasing, has not emerged one bit.

Mitchell responds to how well the rest of the team is playing. When other guys aren't playing well he takes over. That's what you need your leader to do. Garland and Strus combined to go 4/25 and couldn't get to the line, and Jerome had lost everyone's confidence. Allen went 0/1 with 1 rebound in the second half-- that's on him. Name once you've seen Mobley call for the ball? Never mind call for the ball and not get it. He's not The Guy yet.

Even if the plan is to get younger and contend at a later timeline, you need to get below the 2nd apron immediately so don't limit yourself during the Mobley timeline.

Teams generally don't improve by trading top 10-15 players for lesser players, and I think that would be true here. If they want to breakup the small backcourt, Garland is the one to move.