Facilitating Lebron to Cavs

[Texas Chuck]

People have taken leave of their senses. LBJ will be 40 years old. He wants $100M over 2 years and a NTC. He can walk to Philly, and just might, in which case the Lakers will get exactly what they gave up for him - cap space. There's no scenario where Altman agrees to swap Garland for him. He'll get fired for even bringing it to the owner.

If I could trade Garland for Lebron, I would do it so fast. Lebron is still a much better player and he solves a bunch of lineup issues. I'm not at all worried that Garland could still be my 4th best player in 3 years when Lebron retires. I want to win championships. This absolutely increases those odds.

I know you would. Everyone on this website knows you would. But in my judgment, you're way, way too dismissive of the downside risks and way too eager to believe every older star player has a couple of really good seasons left in them.

Or

Or

Lebron was better than Garland this season, and last season, and the one before that, and the one before that, and the one before that.

Maybe my take is Lebron helps Cleveland win more than Garland. But do go off I guess lol?

[toooskies]

It would have to be Garland + filler(s). Mitchell gives them a better chance to win now than Garland. Lakers can basically tell LeBron that's the deal or he can take a massive pay cut to go home.

I think Garland might be worth slightly more than LeBron, but I can't see the Lakers adding value. Maybe a 3rd team like the Pels or Nets would send a little extra value although the Lakers would probably want Ingram or Bridges in that scenario

People have taken leave of their senses. LBJ will be 40 years old. He wants $100M over 2 years and a NTC. He can walk to Philly, and just might, in which case the Lakers will get exactly what they gave up for him - cap space. There's no scenario where Altman agrees to swap Garland for him. He'll get fired for even bringing it to the owner.

If I could trade Garland for Lebron, I would do it so fast. Lebron is still a much better player and he solves a bunch of lineup issues. I'm not at all worried that Garland could still be my 4th best player in 3 years when Lebron retires. I want to win championships. This absolutely increases those odds.

I agree, but the chances of Cleveland being very bad in 2027, 2028, and 2029 go up without LeBron, and not owning those picks anymore hurts.

And you worry long-term not just because LeBron may retire. Mitchell may only extend for a few years to trigger his supermax eligibility as early as possible and then leave when LeBron retires.

So you'd better be better than Boston or else you're not increasing your title odds very much. And I don't know if swapping Garland for LeBron makes you the favorite in the east.

Garland + Mobley + filler for LeBron + AD is mighty intriguing, though. LA skips rebuilding and gets a new core, while the Cavs just go for the title.

[Devilanche]

If I could trade Garland for Lebron, I would do it so fast. Lebron is still a much better player and he solves a bunch of lineup issues. I'm not at all worried that Garland could still be my 4th best player in 3 years when Lebron retires. I want to win championships. This absolutely increases those odds.

I know you would. Everyone on this website knows you would. But in my judgment, you're way, way too dismissive of the downside risks and way too eager to believe every older star player has a couple of really good seasons left in them.

Or

Or

Lebron was better than Garland this season, and last season, and the one before that, and the one before that, and the one before that.

Maybe my take is Lebron helps Cleveland win more than Garland. But do go off I guess lol?

Chipping in as an outsider that have no vested interest in Cleveland nor LA.

The sole consideration here is how close to the finals will a as current level LeBron gets Cleveland to over the next 2-3 years ?

If you think he gets you to the eastern conference you probably will pull the trigger.

If you think it’s likely Cleveland will only reach the eastern semis with him, probably play the longer game with younger stars.

[Texas Chuck]

The sole consideration here is how close to the finals will a as current level LeBron gets Cleveland to over the next 2-3 years ?

If you think he gets you to the eastern conference you probably will pull the trigger.

If you think it’s likely Cleveland will only reach the eastern semis with him, probably play the longer game with younger stars.

I agree. Though if you aren't good enough to win upgrading Garland to Lebron, you aren't going to be good enough in 3 years because there simply isn't enough internal growth available and they don't have many assets left. And of course Spida only has one year left.

So I'm maximizing now even if I'm not sure I can win the East. But I'd also absolutely believe I could win the East with that upgrade.

[jbk1234]

I know you would. Everyone on this website knows you would. But in my judgment, you're way, way too dismissive of the downside risks and way too eager to believe every older star player has a couple of really good seasons left in them.

Or

Or

Lebron was better than Garland this season, and last season, and the one before that, and the one before that, and the one before that.

Maybe my take is Lebron helps Cleveland win more than Garland. But do go off I guess lol?

Chipping in as an outsider that have no vested interest in Cleveland nor LA.

The sole consideration here is how close to the finals will a as current level LeBron gets Cleveland to over the next 2-3 years ?

If you think he gets you to the eastern conference you probably will pull the trigger.

If you think it’s likely Cleveland will only reach the eastern semis with him, probably play the longer game with younger stars.

It's not the only consideration when you've traded away a half a decade's worth of draft capital.

[Devilanche]

Or

Or

Lebron was better than Garland this season, and last season, and the one before that, and the one before that, and the one before that.

Maybe my take is Lebron helps Cleveland win more than Garland. But do go off I guess lol?

Chipping in as an outsider that have no vested interest in Cleveland nor LA.

The sole consideration here is how close to the finals will a as current level LeBron gets Cleveland to over the next 2-3 years ?

If you think he gets you to the eastern conference you probably will pull the trigger.

If you think it’s likely Cleveland will only reach the eastern semis with him, probably play the longer game with younger stars.

It's not the only consideration when you've traded away a half a decade's worth of draft capital.

Wouldn’t that make win now more urgent ?

Or you prefer a holding pattern and when future draft picks become available for trades, you make your moves then to round out the playoffs rotation ?

[DowJones]

Don’t think it’s happening.

But I’d only do it if it was a Mitchell (if he refuses to extend) or Garland (if Mitchell extends) trade. Split either of the guards trade value to end up with LBJ back home. Garland/Max/LBJ/Mobley/Allen with the extra assets I get - as I do believe Mitchell is worth more than LBJ (not sure if that’s considered controversial but don’t think it should be)

I want to keep Allen/Mobley together for another year or two at least..

Why? We have seen this for 3 years now and I don't know why things would be better in years 4 and 5. Allen will never have more value than he has this year. It is time to really try to upgrade our wings by moving Allen. We can comfortably slide Wade to the 4.

I mean Allen hasn't played a minute of this series and were down 3-1. How's that working?

Your evidence of it *not working* involves a substantial number of minutes where one, or both of them aren't on the floor. The advanced stats certainly don't back up your claim that it doesn't work. We're better when they both play in the same unit.

You made this same argument last year and it makes no sense because I am not saying to get rid of Allen at all costs. Allen is a really good basketball player. Yes, if we get rid of a really good basketball player and replace him with minutes from Niang or Morris then we aren't as good. I am not saying Cleveland is better with Allen out. I feel like I should repeat this point again...Cleveland is a better basketball team with Jarrett Allen than without him. My argument is that Cleveland should do everything they can to trade Allen for a wing at a similar talent level and turn Mobley into a full-time 5.

My evidence of it not working also has to do with the fact that no other legitimate team in the NBA is trying to toss out two non-stretch bigs in 2024. It is too clunky. It is too easy to defend in the playoffs when spacing is tight. You can get away with this in the regular season when teams fly in on Tuesday and out on Wednesday but in a 7 game series you want optimal spacing. I also think you are really stunting Mobley's growth by turning him into a stretch 4 where he is mostly ignored on offense.

[kds92]

LeBron wants to stay on the west coast, but realizes the east is weak. Cavs would have a good shot at making the finals with him.

If he leaves LA, I can only see him going to the Warriors or Cavs. The Sixers make sense and a S&T with the Knicks (S&T replacing Randle) would be a good fit, but I think he's locked into LA and if not, then SF or CLE.

[jbk1234]

Chipping in as an outsider that have no vested interest in Cleveland nor LA.

The sole consideration here is how close to the finals will a as current level LeBron gets Cleveland to over the next 2-3 years ?

If you think he gets you to the eastern conference you probably will pull the trigger.

If you think it’s likely Cleveland will only reach the eastern semis with him, probably play the longer game with younger stars.

It's not the only consideration when you've traded away a half a decade's worth of draft capital.

Wouldn’t that make win now more urgent ?

Or you prefer a holding pattern and when future draft picks become available for trades, you make your moves then to round out the playoffs rotation ?

No. LBJ is, maybe, 2 years away from retirement. Garland is 24. Mobley is 22. We'll be at least a play-in team with those two for as long as the Jazz own our picks and that's assuming they don't improve at all. Then you factor in Allen and Mitchell, whether they're on our roster or traded for other good players, and you're talking about trading away a five-year playoff window for some nebulous increased chance at a title over two years with the bottom falling completely out afterwards.

[jowglenn]

Curious about this as well; with all the buzz around Mitchell leaving, doesn't it make some sense to do a Mitchell-for-LeBron thing? Lakers get back a bona fide all star, Cavs get value for Mitchell before he bolts in free agency and bring the king home.

But all the buzz says Mitchell wants to play in New York. Could a three-way be arranged somehow? LeBron to Cavs, Mitchell to Knicks, Randle to Lakers?

[Dr Positivity]

If Cleveland trades Mitchell and Niang, with only rookie contracts etc back using Detroit, can they sign LBJ to like 2yr86-88 or 3yr130 type? It looks like it?

They need to keep Mitchell as 2nd banana

Garland/Mobley/Allen are a nice group around LBJ IMO. Another year of development from Garland and Mobley and hope for health with Allen..

if LAL refused to work with Cleveland or just wanted Mitchell for LBJ etc, Cleveland could do something like

Mitchell+Niang to Brooklyn
Cam Johnson+Dennis to Detroit
“2 Phoenix firsts and a Dallas one” to Cleveland

Or something similar to that? Theres salaries to play with probably..

And taking it further.. once Cleveland is over the cap, they really could combine Caris with one of Allen or Strus and go get another 30-40 million dollar player while staying under the first apron if they wanted.. they’d have Mitchell’s draft pick return…

Lebron has to go all in next year rather than win in year #2 after trading some assets like with the Lakers. Mitchell is perfect age for Lebron to get ring #5 next year.

[JustBuzzin]

With LeBron already winning a title for Cleveland , I don’t really see coming back home as much of a big draw for him .

Umm it's his home.

The man is Ohio don't get it twisted. Lala land will be there after basketball. His basketball roots are in Ohio.

[axeman23]

It would have to be Garland + filler(s). Mitchell gives them a better chance to win now than Garland. Lakers can basically tell LeBron that's the deal or he can take a massive pay cut to go home.

I think Garland might be worth slightly more than LeBron, but I can't see the Lakers adding value. Maybe a 3rd team like the Pels or Nets would send a little extra value although the Lakers would probably want Ingram or Bridges in that scenario

People have taken leave of their senses. LBJ will be 40 years old. He wants $100M over 2 years and a NTC. He can walk to Philly, and just might, in which case the Lakers will get exactly what they gave up for him - cap space. There's no scenario where Altman agrees to swap Garland for him. He'll get fired for even bringing it to the owner.

Maybe if they gave Ainge a job for the day in the Lakers front offices it might...

[toooskies]

Curious about this as well; with all the buzz around Mitchell leaving, doesn't it make some sense to do a Mitchell-for-LeBron thing? Lakers get back a bona fide all star, Cavs get value for Mitchell before he bolts in free agency and bring the king home.

But all the buzz says Mitchell wants to play in New York. Could a three-way be arranged somehow? LeBron to Cavs, Mitchell to Knicks, Randle to Lakers?

You have to understand that the buzz isn't anybody in the know. The buzz is Stephen A. Smith playing up his Knicks wet dreams because he's too busy to watch a Cavs basketball game and do any analysis.

[Karmaloop]

If Lebron tells Lakers I'm going to Cleveland no matter what, then they can either do a sign and trade or get nothing

Salary+#20? Or Cavs giving up Allen?

If I'm the Lakers, I tell the Cavs to go kick rocks. And until LeBron shows a willingness to take a massive paycut, the Cavaliers can't open up enough cap space to sign LeBron outright.

[Dr Positivity]

If Lebron tells Lakers I'm going to Cleveland no matter what, then they can either do a sign and trade or get nothing

Salary+#20? Or Cavs giving up Allen?

If I'm the Lakers, I tell the Cavs to go kick rocks. And until LeBron shows a willingness to take a massive paycut, the Cavaliers can't open up enough cap space to sign LeBron outright.

Let's say Lebron says he'd also prefer playing in Philly to Lakers (and they're interested), although his top preference is Cleveland. That leaves them in position where they have no choice. With Reaves, Davis and Allen they have a solid core and since they're the Lakers will always be in the market for another star and they can now trade two unprotected 1sts.

[Karmaloop]

Let's say Lebron says he'd also prefer playing in Philly to Lakers (and they're interested), although his top preference is Cleveland. That leaves them in position where they have no choice. With Reaves, Davis and Allen they have a solid core and since they're the Lakers will always be in the market for another star and they can now trade two unprotected 1sts.

You're trying to wrap this all in one nice bow. First off, IF the Cavaliers are trading for LeBron James, they need him to opt into his deal to do so. In this scenario, Philadelphia would be unable to sign him outright and therefore the threat of Philadelphia signing him doesn't exist. Secondly in that same scenario, LeBron opting in would make an Allen for LBJ trade be illegal by more than $26.7M assuming my math is correct. They'd need more salary filler (i.e. Caris LaVert and Max Struss) to make it legal. The main issue is that the Lakers don't have control of their picks until 2028 at the earliest, so they don't have the ability to pivot for a 2nd star to pair with Anthony Davis.

[Dr Positivity]

Let's say Lebron says he'd also prefer playing in Philly to Lakers (and they're interested), although his top preference is Cleveland. That leaves them in position where they have no choice. With Reaves, Davis and Allen they have a solid core and since they're the Lakers will always be in the market for another star and they can now trade two unprotected 1sts.

You're trying to wrap this all in one nice bow. First off, IF the Cavaliers are trading for LeBron James, they need him to opt into his deal to do so. In this scenario, Philadelphia would be unable to sign him outright and therefore the threat of Philadelphia signing him doesn't exist. Secondly in that same scenario, LeBron opting in would make an Allen for LBJ trade be illegal by more than $26.7M assuming my math is correct. They'd need more salary filler (i.e. Caris LaVert and Max Struss) to make it legal. The main issue is that the Lakers don't have control of their picks until 2028 at the earliest, so they don't have the ability to pivot for a 2nd star to pair with Anthony Davis.

They can't do a sign and trade? What if they dumped a player to a 3rd team?

[Karmaloop]

They can't do a sign and trade? What if they dumped a player to a 3rd team?

They can't receive a S&Ted player unless they're under the apron. I believe $179M was the last projection for the first apron for the Cavaliers, and they currently at ~$152M in guaranteed money excluding their FRP. Again, the problem is that LBJ at his max can't be traded for Jarrett Allen straight-up, and he's not taking less than max (or near max).

[Dr Positivity]

They can't do a sign and trade? What if they dumped a player to a 3rd team?

They can't receive a S&Ted player unless they're under the apron. I believe $179M was the last projection for the first apron for the Cavaliers, and they currently at ~$152M in guaranteed money excluding their FRP. Again, the problem is that LBJ at his max can't be traded for Jarrett Allen straight-up, and he's not taking less than max (or near max).

I guess Lebron would have to take 25 mil first year salary in that scenario though I'm not totally ruling it out, it's not the MLE at least

Otherwise they could try a 3 way deal where a 3rd team gets Allen