Who Needs Garland? With NO

[pipfan]

BI to Clev makes A TON of sense
DM/Struss/BI/Mobley/Allen
Some ok bench pieces-all set

Garland is a good player, but not needed in NO anymore. So, where does he fit, and what goes to NO?

SA maybe? Tons of assets and could use a young PG
LAL-but don’t have great assets
Hou gets a longer term answer?

Where does Garland fit?

[jayjaysee]

If Ingram is agreeing to an extension, sure.

If not, I know it will get a lot of hate but I’d trade Garland for his value then trade a piece of that value for Grant versus risking Ingram in UFA. Maybe give up a bit more and get Grant and Thybulle?

[jayjaysee]

I know Orlando signed KCP, but I still like Garland there. Use the room MLE on Goga, cap space for Gary Harris.. Still have a good chunk of cap space to play with to help with the limited matching salary since they probably want to keep a good amount of their guys.

[jbk1234]

The Cavs have some interest at adding Ingram, but not on a vet max. Ingram still wants a max, but we may be at the point where he'll have to get it from a bad team which is less appealing for obvious reasons. I don't think it's a matter of tinkering with value. Fedor has said publicly it's about the money.

The Pelicans would do the deal for Allen and LeVert. The Cavs wouldn't even have to include Garland for the Spurs.

The Cavs have reportedly patched things up with Garland. He's willing to give Atkinson a chance and see if he can institute a more dynamic offense. Trading Garland presents issues for the Cavs in terms of leaving Mitchell on the court as the sole ball handler/playmaker in the postseason and how opposing teams will defend that.

As far as the Spurs, they aren't presently willing to to trade Vassell and so long as that remains the case it's difficult to see how Garland ends up in San Antonio even if the Cavs eventually decided to trade him.

[esvl]

The Nets should be first in the line.

[Whole Truth]

NO's/Green & Zion want/need to switch defend & have their C able to hit an open 3.

Allen doesn't even attempt 3's. Offensively he's better suited to a team playing 4 out apposed to teams cheating off shooters to zone Zion. Where Allen's efficiency is at the rim. Jonas had to reinvent his game to help space the paint. NO's thinking Allen will be able to vertically space the floor will be sadly mistaken IMO. Teams were sagging off 40% shooters to pick a poison. Not having to study Allen removes the choice.

Now that Sarr is no longer a possibility. Isaac is my preferred target despite the injury risk. I'd cater by having quality depth to compensate that fact.

If Isaac is not a possibility then Allen & Levert is probably the 2nd best option available.

If Magic want Garland, trade BI to Cavs, send Garland to Magic for Isaac +

[wemby]

Problem with trading Garland is that there is not much market for him, if you go through the entire NBA

Teams that don't need a lead guard:
Boston Celtics
New York Knicks
Philadelphia 76ers
Toronto Raptors
Chicago Bulls
Detroit Pistons
Indiana Pacers
Milwaukee Bucks
Atlanta Hawks
Charlotte Hornets
Golden State Warriors
Los Angeles Clippers
Sacramento Kings
Dallas Mavericks
Houston Rockets
Memphis Grizzlies
New Orleans Pelicans
Denver Nuggets
Minnesota Timberwolves
Oklahoma City Thunder
Portland Trail Blazers
Los Angeles Lakers
Phoenix Suns

Teams that are tanking and won't pay for a vet:
Brooklyn Nets
Washington Wizards

That leaves only 4 teams:
Miami Heat: don't see them overpaying for Garland as he's not their archetype plus they refused to do so for Lillard.
San Antonio Spurs: had plenty of means but did nothing, instead just drafted a potential PG in Stephon Castle and signed Chris Paul.
Utah Jazz: more likely to sell Lauri than to trade for another small guard the like of whom they already moved from (Mitchell) plus they just drafted Collier.
Orlando Magic: it makes sense, maybe?

So maybe some team who already has a lead guard could try to improve or go younger, but the need for that archetype is very limited and that makes it hard to move him for anywhere near what Cavs could perceive as fair value, which is the same thing Hawks are going through with Trae. My guess is eventually they get moved but won't be for the haul their fans expect.

[wemby]

The Nets should be first in the line.

They just gave themselves a 2 year window to tank by trading Mikal Bridges, and now you want them to sell assets to be in the same place?

[jbk1234]

Problem with trading Garland is that there is not much market for him, if you go through the entire NBA

Teams that don't need a lead guard:
Boston Celtics
New York Knicks
Philadelphia 76ers
Toronto Raptors
Chicago Bulls
Detroit Pistons
Indiana Pacers
Milwaukee Bucks
Atlanta Hawks
Charlotte Hornets
Golden State Warriors
Los Angeles Clippers
Sacramento Kings
Dallas Mavericks
Houston Rockets
Memphis Grizzlies
New Orleans Pelicans
Denver Nuggets
Minnesota Timberwolves
Oklahoma City Thunder
Portland Trail Blazers
Los Angeles Lakers
Phoenix Suns

Teams that are tanking and won't pay for a vet:
Brooklyn Nets
Washington Wizards

That leaves only 4 teams:
Miami Heat: don't see them overpaying for Garland as he's not their archetype plus they refused to do so for Lillard.
San Antonio Spurs: had plenty of means but did nothing, instead just drafted a potential PG is Stephon Castle and signed Chris Paul.
Utah Jazz: more likely to sell Lauri than to trade for another small guard the like of whom they already moved from (Mitchell) plus they just drafted Collier.
Orlando Magic: it makes sense, maybe?

So maybe some team who already has a lead guard could try to improve or go younger, but the need for that archetype is very limited and that makes it hard to move him for anywhere near what Cavs could perceive as fair value, which is the same thing Hawks are going through with Trae. My guess is eventually they get moved but won't be for the haul their fans expect.

Then Garland won't be traded, at least not this season. He's a good player and the Cavs are better with him on the floor.

[wemby]

Then Garland won't be traded, at least not this season. He's a good player and the Cavs are better with him on the floor.

Possibly. Best case scenario for the Cavs is they keep him for now, he gets back to his best game, and when circumstances change and some team needs a PG he becomes an option. But may take time to get good value (if ever), and that's assuming he doesn't ask out before that as his agency leaked. We'll see.

[esvl]

The Nets should be first in the line.

They just gave themselves a 2 year window to tank by trading Mikal Bridges, and now you want them to sell assets to be in the same place?

The Nets can tank while getting a star caliber young player on the roster. He would retain his value and likely gain more going forward. Good investment, good asset management. Garland - Claxton woukd be a nice young core that can be traded or built around.

[tidho]

Then Garland won't be traded, at least not this season. He's a good player and the Cavs are better with him on the floor.

Better than what?

Better than going 4 on 5 - obviously

Better than without him - yes

Better than they should be based on the sum of their talent - no

Better than they need to be to (likely) survive the 1st round next year - no.

[MessiahUjiri]

The Nets should be first in the line.

They just gave themselves a 2 year window to tank by trading Mikal Bridges, and now you want them to sell assets to be in the same place?

The Nets can tank while getting a star caliber young player on the roster. He would retain his value and likely gain more going forward. Good investment, good asset management. Garland - Claxton woukd be a nice young core that can be traded or built around.

I agree with the Nets as a destination. Getting Garland doesn’t hurt the tank much…and they will probably still be bottom 5-6. Also, have to trade DFS this year anyways since he’s going to leave next offseason.


DFS + Cam Johnson
for
Darius Garland


Seems very clean. You could potentially involve Schroder if Nets want to send him out, but here’s the new depth chart:


Mitchell / Porter Jr
Lavert / Strus
DFS / CJohnson
Mobley / DWade / Niang
Allen / (Mobley)

[mg]

The whole league saw the Cavs play their best ball of the season during that stretch when Garland was injured and Donovan ran the team. Maybe Atkinson can find a better way for those 2 to fit together and raise Garland's trade value. The small backcourt is not a recipe for postseason success especially against teams such as Boston and Knicks that have so many lengthy perimeter defenders.

[wemby]

I agree with the Nets as a destination. Getting Garland doesn’t hurt the tank much…and they will probably still be bottom 5-6. Also, have to trade DFS this year anyways since he’s going to leave next offseason.


DFS + Cam Johnson
for
Darius Garland

If that's the price, sure, why not. But I don't think that's what most Cavs fans expect.

[jbk1234]

The whole league saw the Cavs play their best ball of the season during that stretch when Garland was injured and Donovan ran the team. Maybe Atkinson can find a better way for those 2 to fit together and raise Garland's trade value. The small backcourt is not a recipe for postseason success especially against teams such as Boston and Knicks that have so many lengthy perimeter defenders.

Yes, the whole league also saw what happened to *the deepest team in the league * when we went from playing the bottom half of the league to playoff teams in March. CPJ couldn't get the ball across the halfcourt line, Merrill, couldn't get his shot off, and Niang couldn't guard anyone. Meanwhile, while Mitchell got to play with Strus as his backcourt running mate against the softest part of the schedule, Garland was out there with Okoro against the toughest.

People, even Cavs fans, can be mad that the Cavs aren't going to base their entire evaluation on Garland based on what happened last season, but they're taking a longer view unded a new coach. Well-run organizations don't make decisions from a place of emotion.

Not for nothing, but it was Garland, not Mitchell, who was responsible for the Cavs only win against the Knicks.

[louc1970]

The Nets should be first in the line.

Can you explain why?
Nets will be moving Johnson soon. They will Claxton/Thomas and ..... a last place team.
Can't see that being inviting for garland unless he simply wants to be paid to lose games.

Magic, Heat, Wolves, Rockets (if FVV is not in the plans), Utah (if keeping Markkanen and they want to win).

[jbk1234]

The Nets should be first in the line.

They just gave themselves a 2 year window to tank by trading Mikal Bridges, and now you want them to sell assets to be in the same place?

Wrong post.

[aguiar95]

Given that ORL still has cap space, how about:

Garland for Suggs, Anthony, 1st ?

Garland/KCP/Wagner/Banchero/Carter

Mitchell/Suggs/Struss/Mobley/Allen

[jbk1234]

Given that ORL still has cap space, how about:

Garland for Suggs, Anthony, 1st ?

Garland/KCP/Wagner/Banchero/Carter

Mitchell/Suggs/Struss/Mobley/Allen

Not interested in taking back Anthony and not interested in making the Magic a lot better.