Cleveland/Portland/ Washington

bgrep14 · Post #1 » by **bgrep14** » Sat Jul 19, 2025 12:34 am

Cleveland: Garland
Cleveland: Holiday, Reath, and 2 top 5 protected Washington 1sts

Washington: McCollum, 2 5 protected 1sts, and 1 lottery protected 1st
Washington: Garland

Portland: Holiday and Reath
Portland: McCollum and 1 lottery protected 1st

Washington locks up a young pg

Portland reunites McCollum

Cavs get defense and picks

JRoy · Post #2 » by **JRoy** » Sat Jul 19, 2025 12:35 am

Pass on CJ. No interest in a reunion.

Malapropism · Post #3 » by **Malapropism** » Sat Jul 19, 2025 12:54 am

Washington is in no position to be trading their own picks.

Myth · Post #4 » by **Myth** » Sat Jul 19, 2025 1:17 am

It makes sense for Portland if CJ is used as an expirer and if it is a 1st expected to convey. But where this gets really problematic is if the 1st is one of those “or extinguishes”/“becomes a 2nd” type of deals. Additionally, it would be odd to bring CJ for a year then say bye right as Lillard is about to play, and more problematic to re-sign him and have multiple poor defending guards once again.

I think if anything, Portland tries to cut out Washington and send out a couple picks of their own to swap Jrue for Garland. Portland can then dangle Scoot for an upgrade at another position, or swap him for future picks (meant to be used in a future trade). Essentially, Garland becomes the new Blazers starting PG, Lillard backs him up, Scoot is swapped for an upgrade or other assets.

Post #5 » by **jbk1234** » Sat Jul 19, 2025 3:00 am

The Cavs seem disinclined to trade Garland at all, but they're certainly not taking back Jrue's contract. At least there's a certain logic to the Garland to the Nets for cap space and picks. Getting stuck over the 2nd apron with Jrue's deal just isn't something that's going to happen.

GatherStepGuru · Post #6 » by **GatherStepGuru** » Sat Jul 19, 2025 11:59 am

Makes no sense for WAS to give up 3 future 1sts for an expensive point guard entering his prime when none of the rest of the team is developed or set in roles. Washington is still looking for a go-to guy, and Garland is not that.

Myth · Post #7 » by **Myth** » Sat Jul 19, 2025 12:30 pm

GatherStepGuru wrote:Makes no sense for WAS to give up 3 future 1sts for an expensive point guard entering his prime when none of the rest of the team is developed or set in roles. Washington is still looking for a go-to guy, and Garland is not that.

More reason to switch it to Garland to Portland.

Post #8 » by **nate33** » Sat Jul 19, 2025 2:04 pm

When teams trade stars for 3 FRP's, it's usually 3 FRP's from a contender or a regular playoff team, not a rebuilding team. Getting, say, the #18, #23 and #26 pick from a contender over the next 5 years is a heck of a lot different than getting the #6, #8 and #13 picks from a rebuilding team. Garland on a max contract is absolutely not worth 2 or 3 lotto picks. That's absurd.

Not to mention that trading away two top 5 protected picks could result in a situation where the Wizards' picks are encumbered for 6 or 7 years.

Post #9 » by **jbk1234** » Sat Jul 19, 2025 7:10 pm

nate33 wrote:When teams trade stars for 3 FRP's, it's usually 3 FRP's from a contender or a regular playoff team, not a rebuilding team. Getting, say, the #18, #23 and #26 pick from a contender over the next 5 years is a heck of a lot different than getting the #6, #8 and #13 picks from a rebuilding team. Garland on a max contract is absolutely not worth 2 or 3 lotto picks. That's absurd.

Not to mention that trading away two top 5 protected picks could result in a situation where the Wizards' picks are encumbered for 6 or 7 years.

I don't blame the Wizards for passing given the current state of the team, but at some point you have to put real value on the table to get value in return. No one is trading a 25 year old, 2X all star, for meh picks and filler

Post #10 » by **nate33** » Sat Jul 19, 2025 11:08 pm

jbk1234 wrote:
nate33 wrote:When teams trade stars for 3 FRP's, it's usually 3 FRP's from a contender or a regular playoff team, not a rebuilding team. Getting, say, the #18, #23 and #26 pick from a contender over the next 5 years is a heck of a lot different than getting the #6, #8 and #13 picks from a rebuilding team. Garland on a max contract is absolutely not worth 2 or 3 lotto picks. That's absurd.

Not to mention that trading away two top 5 protected picks could result in a situation where the Wizards' picks are encumbered for 6 or 7 years.

I don't blame the Wizards for passing given the current state of the team, but at some point you have to put real value on the table to get value in return. No one is trading a 25 year old, 2X all star, for meh picks and filler

Teams with an 18-win record don't go all in and trade away 3 future FRP's for a borderline All-Star who is arguably overpaid on his current contract.