thelead wrote:SOUL wrote:
context?
you know...
But in all seriousness, probably just calling for a Pistol action play.
Moderators: Howard Mass, UCFJayBird, Def Swami, UCF, Knightro, ChosenSavior
thelead wrote:SOUL wrote:
context?
thelead wrote:SOUL wrote:
context?
Bensational wrote:Garland falling apart in the crunch for the Cavs, guy is struggling to keep possession of the ball let alone create offense for the team.
Knightro wrote:Bensational wrote:Garland falling apart in the crunch for the Cavs, guy is struggling to keep possession of the ball let alone create offense for the team.
He's had a tough adjustment to Mitchell completely taking control of the team.
But... Mitchell probably isn't going to sign an extension, so the Cavs are in a weird spot.
Their best lineups seem to be Mitchell on the ball, Allen as the primary screen and roll guy and three shooters, but Garland's already gotten an extension and Mobley is due one this upcoming summer so it seems unlikely they can trade either one of them with Mitchell unwilling to commit.
I'd still make a big offer for Garland this summer regardless.
thelead wrote:Knightro wrote:Bensational wrote:Garland falling apart in the crunch for the Cavs, guy is struggling to keep possession of the ball let alone create offense for the team.
He's had a tough adjustment to Mitchell completely taking control of the team.
But... Mitchell probably isn't going to sign an extension, so the Cavs are in a weird spot.
Their best lineups seem to be Mitchell on the ball, Allen as the primary screen and roll guy and three shooters, but Garland's already gotten an extension and Mobley is due one this upcoming summer so it seems unlikely they can trade either one of them with Mitchell unwilling to commit.
I'd still make a big offer for Garland this summer regardless.
I'd rather try to get Mitchell to commit with his new buddy Paolo
RookieStar wrote:thelead wrote:Knightro wrote:
He's had a tough adjustment to Mitchell completely taking control of the team.
But... Mitchell probably isn't going to sign an extension, so the Cavs are in a weird spot.
Their best lineups seem to be Mitchell on the ball, Allen as the primary screen and roll guy and three shooters, but Garland's already gotten an extension and Mobley is due one this upcoming summer so it seems unlikely they can trade either one of them with Mitchell unwilling to commit.
I'd still make a big offer for Garland this summer regardless.
I'd rather try to get Mitchell to commit with his new buddy Paolo
DON seems to be the kind of guy that wants the bright lights. NY or Cali kind of dude.... based on what im hearing anyway...
thelead wrote:that is the talk... and if it's true, Cleveland will have no choice but to trade him to one of the handful of teams he approves us. Which means Garland wouldn't be on the table anyway.
Knightro wrote:thelead wrote:that is the talk... and if it's true, Cleveland will have no choice but to trade him to one of the handful of teams he approves us. Which means Garland wouldn't be on the table anyway.
It's a really tricky scenario the Cavs are in.
They are *clearly* better with Mitchell as their lead guard. But Mitchell only has one year left on his contract and Garland has four years left on his.
If they flame out early in the playoffs again and Garland plays poorly, are they really going to deal Mitchell over Garland when he's unquestionably better than Garland?
thelead wrote:Franz back in a 3 pt slump. Shooting 13% from deep over his last 5 games (2/15). Sigh...
Knightro wrote:thelead wrote:that is the talk... and if it's true, Cleveland will have no choice but to trade him to one of the handful of teams he approves us. Which means Garland wouldn't be on the table anyway.
It's a really tricky scenario the Cavs are in.
They are *clearly* better with Mitchell as their lead guard. But Mitchell only has one year left on his contract and Garland has four years left on his.
If they flame out early in the playoffs again and Garland plays poorly, are they really going to deal Mitchell over Garland when he's unquestionably better than Garland?
SOUL wrote:
thelead wrote:Franz back in a 3 pt slump. Shooting 13% from deep over his last 5 games (2/15). Sigh...
Bensational wrote:Knightro wrote:thelead wrote:that is the talk... and if it's true, Cleveland will have no choice but to trade him to one of the handful of teams he approves us. Which means Garland wouldn't be on the table anyway.
It's a really tricky scenario the Cavs are in.
They are *clearly* better with Mitchell as their lead guard. But Mitchell only has one year left on his contract and Garland has four years left on his.
If they flame out early in the playoffs again and Garland plays poorly, are they really going to deal Mitchell over Garland when he's unquestionably better than Garland?
Mitchell is a tricky one himself. He has a history of being a regular season leader and post season flop, but with his level of ability and experience he’s worth gambling on if you can partner him with the right star.
Problem for him is that the bright lights destinations he’s rumoured to want to go to aren’t great fits for him. NYK won’t get the most out of him with a Mitchell/Brunson backcourt. BKN don’t have much to partner him with outside of Bridges. Clippers are stacked as is and I don’t see their veterans being happy about being traded away to Cleveland. Lakers don’t have any assets to offer for him.
Ultimately they got a nice short term boost from Mitchell, but their aggressive moves might end their run and flexibility early too.
RichCollab wrote:We need a 1st quarter knockout. Let’s not play with our food this game.
3ddman23 wrote:Huge day for the magic. If they win and the knicks and Philly lose. The magic jump to the 4th seed. Which would be wild to think about this late in the season.