Trade offers for Darius Garland?

[Texas Chuck]

One of the wider spans of value I can recall seeing. I will say this much--if those assigning him neutral value (Miles Bridges/Russell jump out) are correct, he almost certainly doesn't get dealt.

Conversely i think teams pivot to murray if the asking price is ~4 1sts that i see on the other end of the spectrum.

Oh I can't imagine he returns some kind of mega premium return. He simply doesn't have enough of a track record and he's got a big contract.

But I could at least imagine the possibility of one team really valuing him (see IQ) and paying more than I think is reasonable. I can't imagine a scenario where Cleveland just gives him away for nothing like some posters want them to do in a way that coincidentally brings him to the team they root for.

[Slim Charless]

I think these valuations for Garland are excessive. Cleveland would be lucky to trade Garland straight up for Ingram. New Orleans definitely would not be adding anything.

Garland on a max contract with his defensive limitations and injury history is not THAT valuable.

I don't disagree about Garland, but...How's Ingram's contract, defensive limitations and injury history?

Seriously. Garland had a bad playoffs, but he has more value than Ingram. Easily, IMO.

He's the far superior player especially when you take into effect age.

[Euphonetiks]

It sounds like Ingram is getting moved this offseason. What are the Pelicans looking for? You guys have Jones/Murphy/Zion to handle the perimeter but you desperately need a PG and you probably need a center as well. What type of trade packages would the Pels be looking for?

Per our POBO, he wants to add a higher IQ ball handler (not necessarily a pg) who can also contribute offball and an athletic center. Expanding on that, we need players that will help maximize Zion's impact. Zion is difficult to build around due to his shot chart, so spacing will always be a consideration. He also has not been a great defender in the league though he was in college and he has been above average for a couple of years now. I think Herb and Trey are perfect complementary players at the wings.

Names that come up for the ballhandler: DJM, Trae, Garland, top 3 draft pick (guessing Reed), Simons, C. White, Sexton, and others.
Names that come up for the big: WCJ, Isaac, Okongwu, KAT, Allen, Mobley, Stewart, M Robinson, Claxton, Naz, Kessler.

Obviously there are a lot of moving pieces with these. I personally do not think Zion would benefit as much from a rim runner type center because it is really difficult to compensate for having 2/5 of your starting lineup shooting zero 3's. We also had a good defense this year despite having Jonas/Larry at the C position.

[Euphonetiks]

I think these valuations for Garland are excessive. Cleveland would be lucky to trade Garland straight up for Ingram. New Orleans definitely would not be adding anything.

Garland on a max contract with his defensive limitations and injury history is not THAT valuable.

I don't disagree about Garland, but...How's Ingram's contract, defensive limitations and injury history?

Seriously. Garland had a bad playoffs, but he has more value than Ingram. Easily, IMO.

He's the far superior player especially when you take into effect age.

How is Garland easily far superior to Ingram? He's 24, but Ingram is still only 26. The age difference doesn't much matter for another 5 years. Garland plays a less valuable position and his defense is much more of a problem than Ingram's for teams with post-season ambitions.

Ingram in his down year 20.8/5.1/5.7 on .578 TS%
Garland in his down year 18.0/2.7/6.5 on .560 TS%

Garland sure doesn't look like the "far superior player".

[wemby]

Vassel + Hawks 25/27 1sts + Bulls 1st.

PG is the most oversaturated position in the league, Garland is seriously overpaid, and I'm not sure I'd trade Vassel straight up for him, let alone all the picks. No defense, flashy PGs get overrated to a ridiculous extent over here. Give me Sheppard, Dillingham, Topic, whichever the Spurs can get their hands on in this draft, I feel much more comfortable all around considering assets needed to acquire him and salary implications.

[jbk1234]

I don't disagree about Garland, but...How's Ingram's contract, defensive limitations and injury history?

Seriously. Garland had a bad playoffs, but he has more value than Ingram. Easily, IMO.

He's the far superior player especially when you take into effect age.

How is Garland easily far superior to Ingram? He's 24, but Ingram is still only 26. The age difference doesn't much matter for another 5 years. Garland plays a less valuable position and his defense is much more of a problem than Ingram's for teams with post-season ambitions.

Ingram in his down year 20.8/5.1/5.7 on .578 TS%
Garland in his down year 18.0/2.7/6.5 on .560 TS%

Garland sure doesn't look like the "far superior player".

I think most evaluators look at Ingram and conclude he's reached his ceiling, as to where they look at what Garland was doing before the Cavs traded for Mitchell and think there's real potential there.

Also, when a player's down year coincidences with him breaking his jaw, losing 12lbs midseason, and coming back to a roster that had all of Mitchell, Strus, Mobley, and Wade out, during the toughest part of the schedule, it's easier to conclude that his down year isn't indicative of future play

[DowJones]

It sounds like Ingram is getting moved this offseason. What are the Pelicans looking for? You guys have Jones/Murphy/Zion to handle the perimeter but you desperately need a PG and you probably need a center as well. What type of trade packages would the Pels be looking for?

Per our POBO, he wants to add a higher IQ ball handler (not necessarily a pg) who can also contribute offball and an athletic center. Expanding on that, we need players that will help maximize Zion's impact. Zion is difficult to build around due to his shot chart, so spacing will always be a consideration. He also has not been a great defender in the league though he was in college and he has been above average for a couple of years now. I think Herb and Trey are perfect complementary players at the wings.

Names that come up for the ballhandler: DJM, Trae, Garland, top 3 draft pick (guessing Reed), Simons, C. White, Sexton, and others.
Names that come up for the big: WCJ, Isaac, Okongwu, KAT, Allen, Mobley, Stewart, M Robinson, Claxton, Naz, Kessler.

Obviously there are a lot of moving pieces with these. I personally do not think Zion would benefit as much from a rim runner type center because it is really difficult to compensate for having 2/5 of your starting lineup shooting zero 3's. We also had a good defense this year despite having Jonas/Larry at the C position.

I agree with this. Would Garland for Ingram straight up work? Would Pelicans fans rather have Trae, DJM, or Garland for Ingram?

[Euphonetiks]

Seriously. Garland had a bad playoffs, but he has more value than Ingram. Easily, IMO.

He's the far superior player especially when you take into effect age.

How is Garland easily far superior to Ingram? He's 24, but Ingram is still only 26. The age difference doesn't much matter for another 5 years. Garland plays a less valuable position and his defense is much more of a problem than Ingram's for teams with post-season ambitions.

Ingram in his down year 20.8/5.1/5.7 on .578 TS%
Garland in his down year 18.0/2.7/6.5 on .560 TS%

Garland sure doesn't look like the "far superior player".

I think most evaluators look at Ingram and conclude he's reached his ceiling, as to where they look at what Garland was doing before the Cavs traded for Mitchell and think there's real potential there.

Also, when a player's down year coincidences with him breaking his jaw, losing 12lbs midseason, and coming back to a roster that had all of Mitchell, Strus, Mobley, and Wade out, during the toughest part of the schedule, it's easier to conclude that his down year isn't indicative of future play

Convenient for Cleveland that Garland is afforded excuses, but not Ingram. I think most evaluators value big wings a lot more than small guards whose ceilings are inherently limited.

Lets go the year before then:
Ingram last year: 24.7/5.5/5.8 on .582 TS%
Garland last year: 21.6/2.7/7.8 on .587 TS%

Again, Garland does not look like the "far superior player". Cavs fans will say that Mitchell has held him back, but what team is going to trade for Garland to be their #1 offensive engine with the ball always in his hands?

[DowJones]

I think Garland could be considered a better asset because he is younger with more upside. I could also see the argument for Ingram because he plays a more important position.

[Euphonetiks]

I agree with this. Would Garland for Ingram straight up work? Would Pelicans fans rather have Trae, DJM, or Garland for Ingram?

If it is essentially a 1 for 1 Ingram trade, I prefer DJM because we don't have to figure out a way to hide him on defense in a post-season setting. He can play with CJ this year and his contract gives us breathing room to take back salary on a future CJ trade.

Where things change is if Mitchell wants to extend with Cleveland and demands that Cleveland keep Allen, I would be interested in a Garland + Mobley for Ingram + Herb + draft capital trade. But I don't think Cleveland fans have any interest in moving Mobley.

[jbk1234]

How is Garland easily far superior to Ingram? He's 24, but Ingram is still only 26. The age difference doesn't much matter for another 5 years. Garland plays a less valuable position and his defense is much more of a problem than Ingram's for teams with post-season ambitions.

Ingram in his down year 20.8/5.1/5.7 on .578 TS%
Garland in his down year 18.0/2.7/6.5 on .560 TS%

Garland sure doesn't look like the "far superior player".

I think most evaluators look at Ingram and conclude he's reached his ceiling, as to where they look at what Garland was doing before the Cavs traded for Mitchell and think there's real potential there.

Also, when a player's down year coincidences with him breaking his jaw, losing 12lbs midseason, and coming back to a roster that had all of Mitchell, Strus, Mobley, and Wade out, during the toughest part of the schedule, it's easier to conclude that his down year isn't indicative of future play

Convenient for Cleveland that Garland is afforded excuses, but not Ingram. I think most evaluators value big wings a lot more than small guards whose ceilings are inherently limited.

Lets go the year before then:
Ingram last year: 24.7/5.5/5.8 on .582 TS%
Garland last year: 21.6/2.7/7.8 on .587 TS%

Again, Garland does not look like the "far superior player". Cavs fans will say that Mitchell has held him back, but what team is going to trade for Garland to be their #1 offensive engine with the ball always in his hands?

When Garland was the primary ball handler, he averaged 8.6 assists per game. That's different than someone who averages half as much and takes 5-10 more FGAs per game.

Also Garland is currently making 25% of the cap and I'm really skeptical that Ingram accepts that. Suffice to say neither of us favor this swap.

[Xman]

So - possibles suggested
(going to ignore the pick heavy ideas because CLE is win now)

Ingram/Alvarado or CJ
Vassell/Keldon
Dillon Brooks (I think he would be perfect next to Mitchell)
Vleet
Simons/Brogdon

Teams that should want Garland:
SA - need a pg and has cap space
ORL - same
NO - still looking for the guy
BKN
HOU
UTA
ATL - Bog, Murray, Young, Hunter add up to interesting options.

Option 1: Brooks
a - Vleet, DBrooks, to CLE for Garland, Niang, LeVert
b - CLE gets Brooks, Tate, Simons: ORL gets Vleet, Landale: HOU gets Garland, JIsaac, Jett: POR gets #3, LeVert
c - CLE gets Brogdon, DBrooks: HOU gets Garland, RWilliams JGrant: POR gets #3, LeVert, Vleet
d - etc - lots of combos.
- - DBrooks would be so perfect in CLE. But, I am not sure if Vleet is a good fit next to Mitchell. Vleet is solid but the Rockets can replace him - even though he was great for them last year - would be perfect in SA to do it again for them (or in ORL/POR).

Option 2: New Orleans
a - Garland and LeVert for Ingram and some combo of (17, 21, 2025 LAL 1st, Alvarado, Daniels, Hawkins, Nance)
- lots of flexibility depending on GM's value evaluation.

b - does a Garland/CJ swap work or make sense? Picks or players added?
CJ, #21 and Herb for Garland and LeVert. Work?

[hugepatsfan]

The all star version of Garland is, IMO, predicated on him having the ball in his hands most of the time. That's where he does most of his work. But while he can produce all star numbers in that role, I'm not sure an offense that runs primarily through him has a championship type of upside. And then on top of it he brings defensive limitations due to size.

He's a very good player but not sure him playing his game at a high level yields a championship upside kind of team. And while teams will pay max contracts to retain guys like that, usually to get a huge trade haul it has to be someone that teams see championship upside with. So I think his value will always be somewhat capped to a degree.

[Slim Charless]

How is Garland easily far superior to Ingram? He's 24, but Ingram is still only 26. The age difference doesn't much matter for another 5 years. Garland plays a less valuable position and his defense is much more of a problem than Ingram's for teams with post-season ambitions.

Ingram in his down year 20.8/5.1/5.7 on .578 TS%
Garland in his down year 18.0/2.7/6.5 on .560 TS%

Garland sure doesn't look like the "far superior player".

I think most evaluators look at Ingram and conclude he's reached his ceiling, as to where they look at what Garland was doing before the Cavs traded for Mitchell and think there's real potential there.

Also, when a player's down year coincidences with him breaking his jaw, losing 12lbs midseason, and coming back to a roster that had all of Mitchell, Strus, Mobley, and Wade out, during the toughest part of the schedule, it's easier to conclude that his down year isn't indicative of future play

Convenient for Cleveland that Garland is afforded excuses, but not Ingram. I think most evaluators value big wings a lot more than small guards whose ceilings are inherently limited.

Lets go the year before then:
Ingram last year: 24.7/5.5/5.8 on .582 TS%
Garland last year: 21.6/2.7/7.8 on .587 TS%

Again, Garland does not look like the "far superior player". Cavs fans will say that Mitchell has held him back, but what team is going to trade for Garland to be their #1 offensive engine with the ball always in his hands?

It's true though, prior to DM getting there Garland was 1 of the league's best young PGs. My guess is he'll go right back to that once he's the lead ball handler for another team.

Garland had a freak injury of a broken jaw, which it took him awhile to rebound from, BI has had constant nagging injuries almost every year. If he wasn't playing with Zion, more would be made of his never ending unavailability. Garland is younger and while neither are good defenders, at least Garland is short....what's BI's excuse for being terrible on D? When he's like 6'9 with a huge wingspan.

I have it as a big gap between the two. I think Pels would need to offer both Dyson and #17. That said, the fit makes no sense with CJ another short guard.

[mademan]

Garland has 4 more years under contract after this year and Ingram has 1. There's a decent gap in their value based on that alone

Lakers 2025 1st + Dyson Daniels is what it would take, imo, to close that gap. That's a lot of years of control

[HadAnEffectHere]

Garland has 4 more years under contract after this year and Ingram has 1. There's a decent gap in their value based on that alone

Lakers 2025 1st + Dyson Daniels is what it would take, imo, to close that gap. That's a lot of years of control

Let's be real, Ingram will almost certainly agree to stay with a team if they give him a four year max extension, lol.

Both guys have... Not great contracts though Ingram's contract will be worse due to his injury concerns and him making 30% of the cap vs. <25% for Garland.

[DowJones]

I agree with this. Would Garland for Ingram straight up work? Would Pelicans fans rather have Trae, DJM, or Garland for Ingram?

If it is essentially a 1 for 1 Ingram trade, I prefer DJM because we don't have to figure out a way to hide him on defense in a post-season setting. He can play with CJ this year and his contract gives us breathing room to take back salary on a future CJ trade.

Where things change is if Mitchell wants to extend with Cleveland and demands that Cleveland keep Allen, I would be interested in a Garland + Mobley for Ingram + Herb + draft capital trade. But I don't think Cleveland fans have any interest in moving Mobley.

No, the Cavs wouldn't consider that version and the fans would hate it even more.

I really do think Atlanta would pull the trigger on a DJM for Ingram swap. That would make sense for the Hawks.

[psman2]

Garland has 4 more years under contract after this year and Ingram has 1. There's a decent gap in their value based on that alone

Lakers 2025 1st + Dyson Daniels is what it would take, imo, to close that gap. That's a lot of years of control

If that is the cost then DJM for likely half that value on a cheaper contract would be the much preferred trade target. Garland would have to rebuild his value quite a bit for team to make that kind of offer right now, and that is not likely to happen next to Mitchell.

[Euphonetiks]

I think most evaluators look at Ingram and conclude he's reached his ceiling, as to where they look at what Garland was doing before the Cavs traded for Mitchell and think there's real potential there.

Also, when a player's down year coincidences with him breaking his jaw, losing 12lbs midseason, and coming back to a roster that had all of Mitchell, Strus, Mobley, and Wade out, during the toughest part of the schedule, it's easier to conclude that his down year isn't indicative of future play

Convenient for Cleveland that Garland is afforded excuses, but not Ingram. I think most evaluators value big wings a lot more than small guards whose ceilings are inherently limited.

Lets go the year before then:
Ingram last year: 24.7/5.5/5.8 on .582 TS%
Garland last year: 21.6/2.7/7.8 on .587 TS%

Again, Garland does not look like the "far superior player". Cavs fans will say that Mitchell has held him back, but what team is going to trade for Garland to be their #1 offensive engine with the ball always in his hands?

When Garland was the primary ball handler, he averaged 8.6 assists per game. That's different than someone who averages half as much and takes 5-10 more FGAs per game.

Also Garland is currently making 25% of the cap and I'm really skeptical that Ingram accepts that. Suffice to say neither of us favor this swap.

It seems like your personal idea of Ingram is not based in reality. Ingram has never taken 5-10 more shots than when Garland was the primary ballhandler. Ingram has also averaged 5.7 AST over the last 3 seasons.

2022-2023 Ingram - 5.8 AST, 24.7 pts on 18.6 FGA.
2023-2024 Ingram - 5.7 AST, 20.8 pts on 15.9 FGA.
2021-2022 Garland - 8.6 AST, 21.7 pts on 17.3 FGA

In Garland's best year, he averaged 0.9 more points on 1.4 more FGA than Ingram's down year. The most attempts Ingram has ever taken was last year at 18.6 FGA which was 1.3 FGA and 3 pts more than Garland's best year as the primary ballhander.

In that year, when Garland had full control as the primary ballhandler, Cleveland's offense was 25th in the league, and he averaged 2.9 more AST than Ingram's down year where New Orleans offense was 13th in the league.

Garland is simply not a "far superior player" to Ingram.

[eitanr]

Ivey and 5th pick for Garland
-Cavs save some cap and could even have their cake and it eat it too IF James wants to come back as an FA. They also have a backup rebuil contingency