Cleveland Cavaliers

[Iwasawitness]

Trade which ever. Mitchell is the better player, so Cleveland should get more him.

I have a better idea: If they continue playing well together, don't trade either of them.

Why would OG be on Mitchell? Because he is the better player. So Garland would be guarded by a sub-par Brunson. Garland had better have better stats. But I am willing to bet if OG played on Garland, the opposite would be true. Not sure of your point.

Well for one thing, no, Brunson wouldn't be guarding Garland. Hart more than likely would, since Brunson on Garland has never worked out well for the Knicks. OG would be on Mitchell because historically, OG has had little to no trouble limiting Mitchell's production. In other words, OG would be on Mitchell because it makes the most sense. If Garland were the better player, I would still want OG on Mitchell because I know he can shut him down. He's done it plenty of times in the past.

Again, said this before - why do posters tell others a certain trade is not going to happen? Has any trade on here been conjured up by a fan and the GM read it and thought good idea and executed the trade? No. A fan board is designed to bring discussion about basketball. And trade board is about possible trades.

Because your trade suggestions are unrealistic. We're not going to humor something that no team in their right mind would ever do.

When you have 2 sets of players that pretty much imitate each other and those are your 4 best players, it is a problem.
Both Mitchell and Garland need the ball to at prime effectiveness. Not that they can't play without the ball, just each is better controlling the offense. As for Allen/Mobley, when they clog the lane, neither Mitchell nor Garland can drive as much as they should.
The defenses are not chasing either Allen or Mobley when they leave the lane.

And this in turn lies the problem with your logic: your blatant misunderstanding of their games.

No, Garland does not need the ball in his hands to be at prime effectiveness. Yes, he's definitely great at running the offense, but one of the reasons why he's so good in the first place is because he's an elite off the ball player. This is one of the reasons why people wanted Cleveland to have a secondary playmaker next to Garland in the first place. Just having him play the James Harden role was a misuse of his talent and he wasn't able to be fully utilized. He's got more in common with Curry than he does with Chris Paul. If I had a choice of Garland having the ball all the time or never having the ball again except for shooting, I would pick the latter.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: I've got no problem with Mitchell being the one to run the offense now. I was under the impression before that Garland had to be the one to do it but now I'm starting to realize that isn't the case. Mitchell may not be on Garland's level in that regard, but he's still good enough at doing it to the point where you can still have an elite offense with Mitchell controlling everything. Garland's off ball abilities make him, if anything, an ideal fit with Mitchell IF they utilize that aspect of his game more. And I think they absolutely should and so far since returning from injury, they've been doing that.

Mobley and Allen haven't been clogging the lane enough to stop Garland and Mitchell from being able to attack the lanes. They're both skilled and crafty enough guards to find openings even with limited spacing. But this goes back to another point I want to make regarding your misunderstanding of their games. One of the reasons Jarrett Allen has been having terrific offensive outings during this hot stretch Cleveland is on is because he's developed a reliable mid range jump shot, which opponents just aren't respecting. When his defenders do in fact start to respect it and give less spacing, Allen's a skilled enough ball handler to attack the paint and get easy scoring opportunities.

Now, a big part of that is due to him not playing with Mobley. He was given all the space in the world to operate. But now with that comes the final piece of the puzzle here, and that is Evan himself. On top of him also developing a better mid range jumper (still needs work obviously and opponents still aren't respecting him enough), it doesn't really matter if him and Allen are clogging up the paint. We've had them back for three games now and one of the things that we're seeing is that teams are paying a heavy price for trying to clog the paint. The fact is, Cleveland's got a lot more shooters surrounding their core four now. You can't ignore them. The Kings learned that the hard way last night with Strus, but Milwaukee was also learning that the hard way with Merrill and Niang. This just isn't the same team from last year. You can't clog the paint anymore, even with Allen and Mobley out there.

You don't have to like the trade, but I would send Garland for Ingram in a heartbeat IF Mitchell resigned. If Mitchell doesn't, then the trade doesn't matter. In fact I would look to send Mitchell to NOP for Ingram if he does not resign.

It's not a matter of me liking the trade or not. Your trade idea is a terrible one and Ingram would not make our team better if he's the one playing at the four, nor is he the one we should be going after. If anything, you should be going after more elite 3/D wings or a legitimate backup big for the centers. Mikal Bridges would be a god send for the Cavaliers. OG Anunoby would make them favorites to come out of the East imo (IF Mobley and Allen are on the team too). Even if we don't get players of that caliber, one good 3/D wing, along with one good backup center and another backup for any position with a few picks thrown in is what you really should be looking for out of a trade for either Garland or Mitchell. I do like Ingram as a player but he's not the kind of person I want on this team.

[toooskies]

That lies at the head of the problem. Cleveland has a guard in Mitchell that can break down a defense and get to the rim very well. But when the lane is clogged with both Mobley and Allen's defensive assignment, the path is too clogged.

Garland can break down a defense just as well, if not better and is better at running the offense. Why is that not important?

If Mitchell resigns, it is time to move Garland and on of Allen/Mobley, depends on who you like best.

Again, I ask: why is Mitchell the one we HAVE to stick with and not Garland? A few things to consider:

Garland has had a down year but it's in large part due to injuries. While I don't think they fit well together, I do think it's salvageable to the point where you can make it work and they can even grow over time and learn to truly thrive off each other. This isn't like LeBron/Westbrook where there was just no chance of it working.

Garland played better in the 2023 playoffs than Mitchell did. While Mitchell is very clearly the better player, his style of play does present some weaknesses that can be exploited by other teams. Garland is not as easily exploitable. He's a terrific playmaking PG with great scoring ability who is also an elite off the ball player. He's very hard to contain. Let's compare this to Mitchell for a second. If Cleveland were to run into, for example, New York again in the playoffs, Mitchell would more than likely be heavily limited by OG's defense, who has historically been a big problem for Donovan.

Next thing to consider goes into the next point you tried to make...

I understand fans of teams like to hang on to their drafted players hoping for the rise of the player. However I envision a team of:
Mitchell, Giddey, Okoro, Ingram, Mobley with at least 2 additional 24 FRPs being a much better team.

This requires flipping Garland to Pelicans for Ingram straight up. And Allen to OKC for Dieng, Giddey, Mann and 2-24 FRPs.
At some point, turn Strus and LaVert into a back-up center and better guards.

This trade scenario you presented is a terrible idea. For one thing, it's probably not going to happen. I love Allen but OKC isn't giving up that much for him. And even if they did, that's still not the right direction to go. But for another, this proposed starting five is not only not a better team by any stretch of the imagination, it's actually creating more problems than you realize. The Mobley/Allen fit is overblown. There are far more positives to it than there are negatives and yet for some reason, people think the lack of spacing they provide ruins their chances of winning. It's not even why they lost last year.

Trade which ever. Mitchell is the better player, so Cleveland should get more him.
Why would OG be on Mitchell? Because he is the better player. So Garland would be guarded by a sub-par Brunson. Garland had better have better stats. But I am willing to bet if OG played on Garland, the opposite would be true. Not sure of your point.

Again, said this before - why do posters tell others a certain trade is not going to happen? Has any trade on here been conjured up by a fan and the GM read it and thought good idea and executed the trade? No. A fan board is designed to bring discussion about basketball. And trade board is about possible trades.

When you have 2 sets of players that pretty much imitate each other and those are your 4 best players, it is a problem.
Both Mitchell and Garland need the ball to at prime effectiveness. Not that they can't play without the ball, just each is better controlling the offense. As for Allen/Mobley, when they clog the lane, neither Mitchell nor Garland can drive as much as they should.
The defenses are not chasing either Allen or Mobley when they leave the lane.
You don't have to like the trade, but I would send Garland for Ingram in a heartbeat IF Mitchell resigned. If Mitchell doesn't, then the trade doesn't matter. In fact I would look to send Mitchell to NOP for Ingram if he does not resign.

I simply disagree that the redundancy in the Cavs' core player skills is unnecessary or wasteful particularly in the playoffs.

You need secondary rim protection in the playoffs or else the other team will scheme the lone rim protector away from the hoop. See the Rudy Gobert Jazz.

You need a second ballhandler unless you have a player who reliably overcomes double-teams by himself, or else the other team just doubles the ballhandler and the possession is broken. See the Cavs-Knicks series last year where the bench units got crushed.

You need redundancy to keep ballhandling and rim protection on the court for the full 48 minutes each game. As long as the Cavs have an adequate backup 4 (in this case: healthy Dean Wade or not-slumping Georges Niang), they don't have to run Mobley and Allen into the ground where tired legs will cause the team to drag later in the series.

Those numbers depend on if you are going by this year or their entire career (24/21 year olds). Giddey and Garland are both pretty close this year in terms of %s.
At the same time, it adds ball handlers and players who can get others involved - Ingram is getting about 5 assists a game.
It makes Cleveland more dangerous.

I'd recheck those shooting percentages. Garland's TS% is 57.4% this season vs. Giddey at 52.4%. They're really not comparable.

And I look at what they do in the game - 47% to 45 % is not much, and 34% to 32% is not a big difference.

Look at the free throw volume difference, then. Per shot, Garland gets twice as many free throws as Giddey.

[INKtastic]

I saw talk about defense.

435 players in the league play 30 minutes or more a game. Including all 5 cavs starters. Those 5 cavs starters are ranked among those 435 players

2. Mitchell
3. Strus
7. Allen
8. Mobley
14. Garland

https://www.nba.com/stats/players/advanced?CF=MIN*GE*30&SeasonType=Regular%20Season&dir=A&sort=DEF_RATING

[Hoppy1]

Trade which ever. Mitchell is the better player, so Cleveland should get more him.

I have a better idea: If they continue playing well together, don't trade either of them.

Why would OG be on Mitchell? Because he is the better player. So Garland would be guarded by a sub-par Brunson. Garland had better have better stats. But I am willing to bet if OG played on Garland, the opposite would be true. Not sure of your point.

Well for one thing, no, Brunson wouldn't be guarding Garland. Hart more than likely would, since Brunson on Garland has never worked out well for the Knicks. OG would be on Mitchell because historically, OG has had little to no trouble limiting Mitchell's production. In other words, OG would be on Mitchell because it makes the most sense. If Garland were the better player, I would still want OG on Mitchell because I know he can shut him down. He's done it plenty of times in the past.

Again, said this before - why do posters tell others a certain trade is not going to happen? Has any trade on here been conjured up by a fan and the GM read it and thought good idea and executed the trade? No. A fan board is designed to bring discussion about basketball. And trade board is about possible trades.

Because your trade suggestions are unrealistic. We're not going to humor something that no team in their right mind would ever do.

When you have 2 sets of players that pretty much imitate each other and those are your 4 best players, it is a problem.
Both Mitchell and Garland need the ball to at prime effectiveness. Not that they can't play without the ball, just each is better controlling the offense. As for Allen/Mobley, when they clog the lane, neither Mitchell nor Garland can drive as much as they should.
The defenses are not chasing either Allen or Mobley when they leave the lane.

And this in turn lies the problem with your logic: your blatant misunderstanding of their games.

No, Garland does not need the ball in his hands to be at prime effectiveness. Yes, he's definitely great at running the offense, but one of the reasons why he's so good in the first place is because he's an elite off the ball player. This is one of the reasons why people wanted Cleveland to have a secondary playmaker next to Garland in the first place. Just having him play the James Harden role was a misuse of his talent and he wasn't able to be fully utilized. He's got more in common with Curry than he does with Chris Paul. If I had a choice of Garland having the ball all the time or never having the ball again except for shooting, I would pick the latter.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: I've got no problem with Mitchell being the one to run the offense now. I was under the impression before that Garland had to be the one to do it but now I'm starting to realize that isn't the case. Mitchell may not be on Garland's level in that regard, but he's still good enough at doing it to the point where you can still have an elite offense with Mitchell controlling everything. Garland's off ball abilities make him, if anything, an ideal fit with Mitchell IF they utilize that aspect of his game more. And I think they absolutely should and so far since returning from injury, they've been doing that.

Mobley and Allen haven't been clogging the lane enough to stop Garland and Mitchell from being able to attack the lanes. They're both skilled and crafty enough guards to find openings even with limited spacing. But this goes back to another point I want to make regarding your misunderstanding of their games. One of the reasons Jarrett Allen has been having terrific offensive outings during this hot stretch Cleveland is on is because he's developed a reliable mid range jump shot, which opponents just aren't respecting. When his defenders do in fact start to respect it and give less spacing, Allen's a skilled enough ball handler to attack the paint and get easy scoring opportunities.

Now, a big part of that is due to him not playing with Mobley. He was given all the space in the world to operate. But now with that comes the final piece of the puzzle here, and that is Evan himself. On top of him also developing a better mid range jumper (still needs work obviously and opponents still aren't respecting him enough), it doesn't really matter if him and Allen are clogging up the paint. We've had them back for three games now and one of the things that we're seeing is that teams are paying a heavy price for trying to clog the paint. The fact is, Cleveland's got a lot more shooters surrounding their core four now. You can't ignore them. The Kings learned that the hard way last night with Strus, but Milwaukee was also learning that the hard way with Merrill and Niang. This just isn't the same team from last year. You can't clog the paint anymore, even with Allen and Mobley out there.

You don't have to like the trade, but I would send Garland for Ingram in a heartbeat IF Mitchell resigned. If Mitchell doesn't, then the trade doesn't matter. In fact I would look to send Mitchell to NOP for Ingram if he does not resign.

It's not a matter of me liking the trade or not. Your trade idea is a terrible one and Ingram would not make our team better if he's the one playing at the four, nor is he the one we should be going after. If anything, you should be going after more elite 3/D wings or a legitimate backup big for the centers. Mikal Bridges would be a god send for the Cavaliers. OG Anunoby would make them favorites to come out of the East imo (IF Mobley and Allen are on the team too). Even if we don't get players of that caliber, one good 3/D wing, along with one good backup center and another backup for any position with a few picks thrown in is what you really should be looking for out of a trade for either Garland or Mitchell. I do like Ingram as a player but he's not the kind of person I want on this team.

So now Brunson guards Okoro? That is just as bad.

[Iwasawitness]

Trade which ever. Mitchell is the better player, so Cleveland should get more him.

I have a better idea: If they continue playing well together, don't trade either of them.

Why would OG be on Mitchell? Because he is the better player. So Garland would be guarded by a sub-par Brunson. Garland had better have better stats. But I am willing to bet if OG played on Garland, the opposite would be true. Not sure of your point.

Well for one thing, no, Brunson wouldn't be guarding Garland. Hart more than likely would, since Brunson on Garland has never worked out well for the Knicks. OG would be on Mitchell because historically, OG has had little to no trouble limiting Mitchell's production. In other words, OG would be on Mitchell because it makes the most sense. If Garland were the better player, I would still want OG on Mitchell because I know he can shut him down. He's done it plenty of times in the past.

Again, said this before - why do posters tell others a certain trade is not going to happen? Has any trade on here been conjured up by a fan and the GM read it and thought good idea and executed the trade? No. A fan board is designed to bring discussion about basketball. And trade board is about possible trades.

Because your trade suggestions are unrealistic. We're not going to humor something that no team in their right mind would ever do.

When you have 2 sets of players that pretty much imitate each other and those are your 4 best players, it is a problem.
Both Mitchell and Garland need the ball to at prime effectiveness. Not that they can't play without the ball, just each is better controlling the offense. As for Allen/Mobley, when they clog the lane, neither Mitchell nor Garland can drive as much as they should.
The defenses are not chasing either Allen or Mobley when they leave the lane.

And this in turn lies the problem with your logic: your blatant misunderstanding of their games.

No, Garland does not need the ball in his hands to be at prime effectiveness. Yes, he's definitely great at running the offense, but one of the reasons why he's so good in the first place is because he's an elite off the ball player. This is one of the reasons why people wanted Cleveland to have a secondary playmaker next to Garland in the first place. Just having him play the James Harden role was a misuse of his talent and he wasn't able to be fully utilized. He's got more in common with Curry than he does with Chris Paul. If I had a choice of Garland having the ball all the time or never having the ball again except for shooting, I would pick the latter.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: I've got no problem with Mitchell being the one to run the offense now. I was under the impression before that Garland had to be the one to do it but now I'm starting to realize that isn't the case. Mitchell may not be on Garland's level in that regard, but he's still good enough at doing it to the point where you can still have an elite offense with Mitchell controlling everything. Garland's off ball abilities make him, if anything, an ideal fit with Mitchell IF they utilize that aspect of his game more. And I think they absolutely should and so far since returning from injury, they've been doing that.

Mobley and Allen haven't been clogging the lane enough to stop Garland and Mitchell from being able to attack the lanes. They're both skilled and crafty enough guards to find openings even with limited spacing. But this goes back to another point I want to make regarding your misunderstanding of their games. One of the reasons Jarrett Allen has been having terrific offensive outings during this hot stretch Cleveland is on is because he's developed a reliable mid range jump shot, which opponents just aren't respecting. When his defenders do in fact start to respect it and give less spacing, Allen's a skilled enough ball handler to attack the paint and get easy scoring opportunities.

Now, a big part of that is due to him not playing with Mobley. He was given all the space in the world to operate. But now with that comes the final piece of the puzzle here, and that is Evan himself. On top of him also developing a better mid range jumper (still needs work obviously and opponents still aren't respecting him enough), it doesn't really matter if him and Allen are clogging up the paint. We've had them back for three games now and one of the things that we're seeing is that teams are paying a heavy price for trying to clog the paint. The fact is, Cleveland's got a lot more shooters surrounding their core four now. You can't ignore them. The Kings learned that the hard way last night with Strus, but Milwaukee was also learning that the hard way with Merrill and Niang. This just isn't the same team from last year. You can't clog the paint anymore, even with Allen and Mobley out there.

You don't have to like the trade, but I would send Garland for Ingram in a heartbeat IF Mitchell resigned. If Mitchell doesn't, then the trade doesn't matter. In fact I would look to send Mitchell to NOP for Ingram if he does not resign.

It's not a matter of me liking the trade or not. Your trade idea is a terrible one and Ingram would not make our team better if he's the one playing at the four, nor is he the one we should be going after. If anything, you should be going after more elite 3/D wings or a legitimate backup big for the centers. Mikal Bridges would be a god send for the Cavaliers. OG Anunoby would make them favorites to come out of the East imo (IF Mobley and Allen are on the team too). Even if we don't get players of that caliber, one good 3/D wing, along with one good backup center and another backup for any position with a few picks thrown in is what you really should be looking for out of a trade for either Garland or Mitchell. I do like Ingram as a player but he's not the kind of person I want on this team.

So now Brunson guards Okoro? That is just as bad.

Dude, how many Cavaliers games have you watched this year? No, he would be guarding Strus, since he's the starting SF, not Okoro. You not even knowing this helps explains your posts.

And while we're on that subject, I would MUCH rather have Brunson guard Okoro than Garland. That goes without saying.

[Hoppy1]

Dude, how many Cavaliers games have you watched this year? No, he would be guarding Strus, since he's the starting SF, not Okoro. You not even knowing this helps explains your posts.

And while we're on that subject, I would MUCH rather have Brunson guard Okoro than Garland. That goes without saying.

You should reread your post.
But you have your opinion and I have mine.

[STAT_88]

Bumpiddy bump.

The Cavs are now a whopping +2.4 in net rating in 337 minutes with the Garland-Mitchell-Strus-Mobley-Allen lineup. This is their most used lineup and their ‘best 5’. I think the Cavs are a first round exit with this lineup.

What would the realGMers do? Remain status quo or make some trades to balance out the team.

They have overlap at both the 1-2 spots with Mitchell and Garland as well as the 4-5 spot with Allen-Mobley.

The Cavs were on fire when Garland was out earlier this year for a stretch of about 20 games.

Still think they are need to move one of Mitchell or Garland for a wing or big guard. And move Allen for a stretch 5 to give Mobley more space around the basket.

KAT is probably available and could play the 5 next to Mobley. Would need to do a 3 team trade and send Allen somewhere with the Wolves getting assets back from the third team.

For the big guard/wing spot:
Nets would likely do Mikal Bridges for Mitchell.
Clips would probably do Paul George and James Harden for Mitchell plus picks and filler.
Pels may do Herb Jones or Tre Murphy for Garland.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[zimpy27]

Bumpiddy bump.

The Cavs are now a whopping +2.4 in net rating in 337 minutes with the Garland-Mitchell-Strus-Mobley-Allen lineup. This is their most used lineup and their ‘best 5’. I think the Cavs are a first round exit with this lineup.

What would the realGMers do? Remain status quo or make some trades to balance out the team.

They have overlap at both the 1-2 spots with Mitchell and Garland as well as the 4-5 spot with Allen-Mobley.

The Cavs were on fire when Garland was out earlier this year for a stretch of about 20 games.

Still think they are need to move one of Mitchell or Garland for a wing or big guard. And move Allen for a stretch 5 to give Mobley more space around the basket.

KAT is probably available and could play the 5 next to Mobley. Would need to do a 3 team trade and send Allen somewhere with the Wolves getting assets back from the third team.

For the big guard/wing spot:
Nets would likely do Mikal Bridges for Mitchell.
Clips would probably do Paul George and James Harden for Mitchell plus picks and filler.
Pels may do Herb Jones or Tre Murphy for Garland.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If they can extend Mitchell then trade Garland for wing help.
If they can't extend Mitchell then trade Mitchell for wing help.

[Roger Murdock]

They need a real coach to see how pieces can fit. JB Bickerstaff should go to the Hornets or Wizards - he can add tremendous value to a bad team that needs to play hard and instill basic displine and culture but he is new terrible strategic mind and matchup coach and a bottom 2 coach for a playoff team

[Statlanta]

They need better role players. Compare them to the Knicks. The Knicks have been stealing good Western Conference role players(or championship ones in the name of Anunoby).

Randle(Pelicans)
Hart(Blazers)
Hartenstein(Clippers)
Brunson(Mavericks)
DiVicenzo(Warriors)

The Knicks surpass them because they keep retooling and never let you fully keep the scouting report based on the team they ran last year while keeping their core identity as a defensive team with Thibodeau.

The Cavaliers are just sitting on Mitchell as an asset and hoping/praying Mobley and Garland get better. That's a recipe to become the 2000s Atlanta Hawks(sitting on Joe Johnson and hoping/praying Marvin Willams and Josh Smith gets better)

[Ralof]

Mitchell Is gone.

Trade him for best assets you could get from LA/NY teams

[basketballRob]

They need better role players. Compare them to the Knicks. The Knicks have been stealing good Western Conference role players(or championship ones in the name of Anunoby).

Randle(Pelicans)
Hart(Blazers)
Hartenstein(Clippers)
Brunson(Mavericks)
DiVicenzo(Warriors)

The Knicks surpass them because they keep retooling and never let you fully keep the scouting report based on the team they ran last year while keeping their core identity as a defensive team with Thibodeau.

The Cavaliers are just sitting on Mitchell as an asset and hoping/praying Mobley and Garland get better. That's a recipe to become the 2000s Atlanta Hawks(sitting on Joe Johnson and hoping/praying Marvin Willams and Josh Smith gets better)

Huh? The Knicks are currently behind them in the standings. I also think the Cavs have better assets.

Sent from my SM-G781U using RealGM mobile app

[Iwasawitness]

Bumpiddy bump.

The Cavs are now a whopping +2.4 in net rating in 337 minutes with the Garland-Mitchell-Strus-Mobley-Allen lineup. This is their most used lineup and their ‘best 5’. I think the Cavs are a first round exit with this lineup.

What would the realGMers do? Remain status quo or make some trades to balance out the team.

They have overlap at both the 1-2 spots with Mitchell and Garland as well as the 4-5 spot with Allen-Mobley.

The Cavs were on fire when Garland was out earlier this year for a stretch of about 20 games.

Still think they are need to move one of Mitchell or Garland for a wing or big guard. And move Allen for a stretch 5 to give Mobley more space around the basket.

KAT is probably available and could play the 5 next to Mobley. Would need to do a 3 team trade and send Allen somewhere with the Wolves getting assets back from the third team.

For the big guard/wing spot:
Nets would likely do Mikal Bridges for Mitchell.
Clips would probably do Paul George and James Harden for Mitchell plus picks and filler.
Pels may do Herb Jones or Tre Murphy for Garland.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Cavs still need to keep Mobley and Allen. Both are too good and valuable to give up just for "fit issues", especially since Mobley has shown progress on developing a three point shot. If he actually manages to become a good three point shooter, this duo is elite tier and going to cause teams a lot of problems. You either let them keep playing together while Mobley is forced to continue to improve his three point shooting (which I'm convinced he will do now), or you have one start over the other and full on commit to it. The problem with this is Mobley still cannot play center full time yet. Until he can, you need to keep Allen at all costs.

I find myself going back and forth on Mitchell/Garland at this point. Before I would have been all for keeping Mitchell and trading Garland, then I feel the opposite and it's just a reoccurring trend. Injuries continue to ruin the chemistry and make it difficult for the two of them to develop any synergy with each other. But I do agree that one of the two need to go, and with how great of a job Mitchell did of running the offense on his own, I am now of the opinion that the Cavaliers can go either direction on this one as both provide their own advantages. With that said, it's very important that they look for a backup PG going forward if they aren't going to give CPJ any actual playing time. And who you are getting in return for one of these two is very important. Another very good, if not elite, 3/D wing is a must here, otherwise it's automatically a failed trade.

Also, whether or not the Cavaliers are a first round exit will depend on who they face. As of right now, the Cavaliers hold the third seed in the East but are just barely clinging to it. They are at an unfavorable part of their schedule still and just lost to the Lakers, and are now about to face the Clippers on a back to back (granted, both games are in LA so it's not the same, but it's still a back to back). Right now, with things playing out the way they are, they are either going to face the Pacers, Magic or the Knicks in the first round.

Pacers: I don't see the Pacers winning against Cleveland. Their lack of consistent defense is going to hurt them as well as being inexperienced. I would have Cleveland winning in five if these two teams met.

Magic: This would be more competitive, but with that said, Cleveland still wins this series, probably in 6. Magic, like the Pacers, lack playoff experience and are a young team. Their rebounding and depth does concern me a little, but overall, I can see this being like Cleveland last year where being under the brighter lights for the first time is a bit much for them. I like Cleveland's chances in this series.

Knicks: **** me if this matchup really happens in the first round again, but with the current records, this is actually a legitimate possibility. And if it does, how soon this series ends will depend on the health of the Knicks. They've lost Randle for the season, and the jury is still out on when OG comes back. IF for some reason OG is not able to play in the playoffs, Cleveland does have a slight chance. Donovan has historically played terrible against OG and can never seem to shake him off. And those rebounding advantages the Knicks hold from last season still exist here. Robinson is back from injury and Hartenstein has had a great season too. Josh Hart is still one of the best rebounding guards in the league. The Knicks have a deep team with lots of veteran players who can impact the game multiple ways. But with that said, Cleveland does have some reasons to feel better about their chances this year. NY will not be able to exploit their lack of three point shooting like they did last year. The Cavs have an abundance of three point shooting this season, with even Mobley as I mentioned before showcasing better three point shooting, as is Okoro. You cannot pack the paint and get away with it like you could last year. You will have to respect it. Cavaliers also have better depth this season. Thompson is still a very capable rebounding big and would be very helpful against a team like the Knicks. Merrill's off ball play is going to keep the Knicks defense very busy and constantly moving. This Cavaliers team is definitely better built to handle a team that relies so much on playing a more physical brand of basketball. But with that said, if OG is playing, the Knicks advantages will still be too much for Cleveland to overcome, and I would see NY winning in 6, and that's me being generous. IF OG isn't playing though... that's an entirely different story.

Of course, all of this could mean nothing either. The playoff standings are very close, and Cleveland could very well lose their first round homecourt advantage if they can't find a way to muster some wins in the remaining games they have. They have been a very good road team this year, but I don't think that's going to matter much if they are still struggling to regain the form they had in the middle of the season when they were the hottest team in the league and dominating everyone they went up against.

[Iwasawitness]

Mitchell Is gone.

Trade him for best assets you could get from LA/NY teams

Miami is a good option to trade with too. But I still like the idea of trying to trade with Brooklyn and see who else they're willing to give up along with Mikal Bridges. His stock as a player has dropped this year which makes it more likely that Cleveland's able to get additional assets on top of him, which is the best case scenario for Cleveland. Bridges is clearly not meant to be the number one option but the good news is that in Cleveland, he wouldn't be.

[JujitsuFlip]

Bumpiddy bump.

What would the realGMers do? Remain status quo or make some trades to balance out the team.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

First and foremost, fire Jb Bickerstaff and Bernie Bickerstaff.

From there, i would contemplate strongly about firing Koby Altman.

Next, offer Mitchell the extension. If he accepts, see if a new coach can make the Mitchell/Garland pairing work as well as see if a new philosophy can make the Allen/Mobley pairing work as far as more offensive spacing.

If Mitchell declines the extension then just trade him for the best package and the new coach can see if one of Mobley or Allen will agree to coming off the bench, if not trade one of them for a stretch big.

[ShootersShoot]

They really need a starting level wing..strus, levert, okoro is one of the worse wing rotations out of all the PO teams

[DowJones]

Trying to turn Mobley into a stretch 4 is frustrating. Cleveland shouldn't take $.50 on the dollar to move Allen (or Mobley) but they really need to look into making a move this summer.

[STAT_88]

Final bump.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Iwasawitness]

Final bump.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Well I was right about Cleveland beating Orlando so I have that going for me.

I still think Cleveland needs to hold onto Mobley/Allen, and need to trade either Garland or Mitchell. At this point I’d rather keep Mitchell but I do acknowledge that both present their own advantages and disadvantages.

[Karate Diop]

If the Cavs were on the other side of the bracket there's a strong possibility they'd be in the conference finals right now.

They were hurt and ran into a team that's a tier or two better. I'm not sure the sky is falling for them unless Mitchell really wants out...