toooskies wrote:jbk1234 wrote:toooskies wrote:The first question is whether the Cavs are a contender with their current roster. If you don't think they are, you have to cut salary or make a big trade to contend. Dan Gilbert isn't paying over $100m in tax for this.
Mobley with Garland is the most star power Milwaukee would get unless Houston makes a stupid offer, and they keep the Bucks from having to rebuild unless they want to. Mobley to Atlanta and Garland to Portland are pretty reasonable follow-ups to get MIlwaukee's picks (and more) back if they want to rebuild, while neither team may want Giannis for his cost.
OTOH the Cavs should be willing to part with both of them because Giannis needs the ball in his hands and Garland + Mitchell will keep it from him too much. He'd need one of them gone from a team-building perspective. And Mobley is a prerequisite for the trade-- Milwaukee doesn't have interest in Mitchell. (If a third team wanted to pay for Mitchell, they'd probably instead pay for Giannis while they're at it.)
It's also possible the Cavs could include one or more of Tyson/Proctor/Tomlin in lieu of draft picks, but I'm not sure where the value is on them around the league.
Whether we're contenders now is a question, but certainly not the only question. The Pacers looked like anything but contenders at this point last season when they were riddled with injuries.
Will Mitchell and Giannis stay healthy throughout the playoffs is another question. How good are the Cavs chances with Giannis, Mitchell, and role players against OKC is another question. Does Giannis want to play here is yet another question. Does Mitchell still want to extend if Giannis does not, is the really, really big question.
Do the Cavs have a chance against OKC at all (or Jokic or Wemby or Luka or Flagg or Dybantsa or...) in the next decade is a question. Is Mitchell going to leave anyway is another question. Does Mobley ask out if we're both not contending and not making him the focal point of the offense is another question. Does Garland ever figure out how to stay healthy (or be effective while at 80% health) is another question. Let's not pretend we're safe from uncertainty on our current trajectory.
If we're maximizing the chances of winning a title over the next 10 years (with OKC and Wemby and Jokic and whoever else out there) we may be better off going all-in now. That does lower the floor of the team long-term if guys don't extend, but we won't be a contender if Mitchell wants to relocate regardless. Now, I don't mind being just very good, but we have to consider the price of being great.
Where I come out is: (1) Giannis isn't LBJ. He's not always healthy, nor even available, come playoff time. He's made the Finals, out of the East, exactly once in his entire career. He's played with peak Middleton, Jrue, and BroLo so it's not as if he's been asked to carry scrubs. I think you're overrating the floor of a Giannis/Mitchell core. I don't believe it's the Finals even assuming both guys are healthy (a risky assumption in and of itself). (2) I can trade Mitchell and get back value if he doesn't extend this summer. I can trade Allen if I decide I'm resetting the time line. If Mobley asks out eventually, I can trade him as well. Nobody is presently in a position of just walking out the door.
I'm very concerned about Garland's toe, mostly because I don’t know what I don’t know, and while I want to trust the Cavs medical staff to make the right choices, I am not at all sure that I do after the Pacers series.
Is this a Jamal Murray situation where he needs to be shut down for a season to get back to where he was? Will he be wearing that metal sleeve inside his shoe regardless, or is this a situation where he can get by without it after a couple months? For the purposes of this conversation, will the Bucks even agree to take him, and will they agree to do so regardless of what the physical shows?
