Official 2025 Offseason Thread

[Orlando Dawg]

Weltman is dying to trade Suggs+Jett for Darius Garland so he can get a better player on paper and save face on the Jett debacle

… but Devos yanked his chain and reminded him that Cavs want Suggs because they have no soul.

[Knightro]

Weltman is dying to trade Suggs+Jett for Darius Garland so he can get a better player on paper and save face on the Jett debacle

… but Devos yanked his chain and reminded him that Cavs want Suggs because they have no soul.

That ship has sailed.

[RichCollab]

Weltman is dying to trade Suggs+Jett for Darius Garland so he can get a better player on paper and save face on the Jett debacle

… but Devos yanked his chain and reminded him that Cavs want Suggs because they have no soul.

You have lost it.

[BadMofoPimp]

Orlando Dawg is dying to trade Suggs+Jett for Darius Garland so he can get a better player on paper and save face on the Jett debacle

… but Magic fans yanked his chain and reminded him that he thinks the Cavs want Suggs because they have no soul.

FIXED!

[Knightro]

I do think there was a world where the Magic would have traded Suggs as the centerpiece for Garland.

I do not think that world exists post Bane trade.

[BadMofoPimp]

I do think there was a world where the Magic would have traded Suggs as the centerpiece for Garland.

I do not think that world exists post Bane trade.

A world only in peoples heads

[RookieStar]

I do think there was a world where the Magic would have traded Suggs as the centerpiece for Garland.

I do not think that world exists post Bane trade.

I think that world ended when Suggs showed his skill in defense and improvement on his 3pt shot

[Knightro]

I do think there was a world where the Magic would have traded Suggs as the centerpiece for Garland.

I do not think that world exists post Bane trade.

I think that world ended when Suggs showed his skill in defense and improvement on his 3pt shot

Lol no. That world existed as recently as the beginning of this offseason.

The Magic were absolutely going to attempt to pursue Garland via trade before the Bane opportunity presented itself.

[RookieStar]

I do think there was a world where the Magic would have traded Suggs as the centerpiece for Garland.

I do not think that world exists post Bane trade.

I think that world ended when Suggs showed his skill in defense and improvement on his 3pt shot

Lol no. That world existed as recently as the beginning of this offseason.

The Magic were absolutely going to attempt to pursue Garland via trade before the Bane opportunity presented itself.

You were that confident we were trading our defense of Suggs plus other assets for Garlands offense?

[Knightro]

You were that confident we were trading our defense of Suggs plus other assets for Garlands offense?

Yes.

What I'm not confident in was whether or not the Cavs would have actually even gone for it. I'm skeptical they would have made that move.

But trading Suggs and what would certainly have ended up being less than 4 picks and a swap for Garland (and thus having the KCP/Cole/picks package available for something else) is something I definitely think they would have pursued.

[RookieStar]

You were that confident we were trading our defense of Suggs plus other assets for Garlands offense?

Yes.

What I'm not confident in was whether or not the Cavs would have actually even gone for it. I'm skeptical they would have made that move.

But trading Suggs and what would certainly have ended up being less than 4 picks and a swap for Garland (and thus having the KCP/Cole/picks package available for something else) is something I definitely think they would have pursued.

But why would the Cavs do that knowing we are a challenger for the ECF against them?

[Knightro]

You were that confident we were trading our defense of Suggs plus other assets for Garlands offense?

Yes.

What I'm not confident in was whether or not the Cavs would have actually even gone for it. I'm skeptical they would have made that move.

But trading Suggs and what would certainly have ended up being less than 4 picks and a swap for Garland (and thus having the KCP/Cole/picks package available for something else) is something I definitely think they would have pursued.

But why would the Cavs do that knowing we are a challenger for the ECF against them?

Because they've flamed out three years in a row in the playoffs with this group without even once making it to the conference finals.

[fendilim]

You were that confident we were trading our defense of Suggs plus other assets for Garlands offense?

Yes.

What I'm not confident in was whether or not the Cavs would have actually even gone for it. I'm skeptical they would have made that move.

But trading Suggs and what would certainly have ended up being less than 4 picks and a swap for Garland (and thus having the KCP/Cole/picks package available for something else) is something I definitely think they would have pursued.

Well, I’m glad we didn’t trade Suggs for Garland.

Suggs and Bane >>>>> Garland and KCP

[RookieStar]

Yes.

What I'm not confident in was whether or not the Cavs would have actually even gone for it. I'm skeptical they would have made that move.

But trading Suggs and what would certainly have ended up being less than 4 picks and a swap for Garland (and thus having the KCP/Cole/picks package available for something else) is something I definitely think they would have pursued.

But why would the Cavs do that knowing we are a challenger for the ECF against them?

Because they've flamed out three years in a row in the playoffs with this group without even once making it to the conference finals.

Yeah.. and their solution to that is making their rivals stronger? By giving said rival the cure for their weakness?

[Knightro]

But why would the Cavs do that knowing we are a challenger for the ECF against them?

Because they've flamed out three years in a row in the playoffs with this group without even once making it to the conference finals.

Yeah.. and their solution to that is making their rivals stronger? By giving said rival the cure for their weakness?

Doesn't that cut both ways though?

The Cavs get tougher and more defense from the guard spots and have the talent necessary to sacrifice offense for defense?

[RookieStar]

Because they've flamed out three years in a row in the playoffs with this group without even once making it to the conference finals.

Yeah.. and their solution to that is making their rivals stronger? By giving said rival the cure for their weakness?

Doesn't that cut both ways though?

The Cavs get tougher and more defense from the guard spots and have the talent necessary to sacrifice offense for defense?

Yeah but as eyriq would boast, we still have AB(lol)

Well... guess you think Cavs think the defense of Suggs can offset their loss of Garland more heavily than us adding offense.

[fendilim]

Well, weltman made the smart move by not trading for garland so as to make the cavs midget backcourt stay together. They’ll really struggle with their small backcourt.

[AdamTheGreek]

I don’t think Weltman had Garland interest. Not at the rumored price point.

I think the Cavs leaked that trade rumor because they want Suggs.

[GelbeWand09]

You were that confident we were trading our defense of Suggs plus other assets for Garlands offense?

Yes.

What I'm not confident in was whether or not the Cavs would have actually even gone for it. I'm skeptical they would have made that move.

But trading Suggs and what would certainly have ended up being less than 4 picks and a swap for Garland (and thus having the KCP/Cole/picks package available for something else) is something I definitely think they would have pursued.

Well, I’m glad we didn’t trade Suggs for Garland.

Suggs and Bane >>>>> Garland and KCP

I would have traded Suggs + a pick for Garland asap because he is the (much) better player so far in their carreers and a very good fit. Suggs + Bane is better than Garland. Question is if its enough playmaking with Bane instead of a real PG like Garland. Question is if the picks were too much. And most important is it sustainable having 4 highly paid players without much draft picks left instead of having 3 highly paid players you can afford better longterm + most of the draft assets. But you probably at least get draft capital back when you have to trade Suggs or Bane because it doesnt worked out or because of financial reasons.

[ORLMagicGirl15]

Yes.

What I'm not confident in was whether or not the Cavs would have actually even gone for it. I'm skeptical they would have made that move.

But trading Suggs and what would certainly have ended up being less than 4 picks and a swap for Garland (and thus having the KCP/Cole/picks package available for something else) is something I definitely think they would have pursued.

Well, I’m glad we didn’t trade Suggs for Garland.

Suggs and Bane >>>>> Garland and KCP

I would have traded Suggs + a pick for Garland asap because he is the (much) better player so far in their carreers and a very good fit. Suggs + Bane is better than Garland. Question is if its enough playmaking with Bane instead of a real PG like Garland. Question is if the picks were too much. And most important is it sustainable having 4 highly paid players without much draft picks left instead of having 3 highly paid players you can afford better longterm + most of the draft assets. But you probably at least get draft capital back when you have to trade Suggs or Bane because it doesnt worked out or because of financial reasons.

If Garland is a much better player, then why would the Cavs want Suggs? Suggs is a defensive guard, who was going to run the Cavs offense?