Spurs trade ideas

[CGD]

With regards to Garland, there is an argument to be made that not only does his fit affect his performance on the Cavs, but the jaw injury may be affecting his performance more than we think - especially for someone who already deals with strength issues due to his slight frame:

https://x.com/bowser2bowser/status/1791130704048177336

Interesting— if there were ever a team that was going to look at all these details, it’s the Spurs

[LeBowen]

Tbh, we think that Garland's price would be way lower than it actually is.
Cavs won't trade him unless Mitc signs an extension, but if he does, then they'll want to improve their roster to actually compete and contend.
Giving them Keldon, maybe Tre and a couple of picks won't be enough.

After this draft, the only pick they all the way up until 2030 is 2026 CLE/UTA/MIN swap.
Garland and Allen trades are their only way to make the roster better.

But then again, if Garland is expensive, why not just go for a better player?
Magic will surely be interested and they got players Cavs will value way more than Keldon.

If PATFO is actually in for Garland and it's not just the usual media nonsense, we'll have to find a third team for the trade.

Imo (and I could be way off), realistic trade would be something like:
Keldon
Tre
Collins
#8 Spurs '24
Chicago '25
Charlotte '25 (I suspect they'd want a better pick, maybe something like worse off Spurs/Hawks '27, but that's up for debate)

Garland
Niang (he's on $8.5M and $8.2M for the next two years, but they hate his fat ass and want to get rid of him. Still, he can shoot and would be useful backup PF for the regular season.)

If Spurs don't want to give up Tre for Niang, then Cavs would definitely want a better pick than Charlotte '25 which won't convey.
Tre would be really useful for them as Mitc 's backup since they'd have no point guards on the roster after Garland gets traded away.

Collins and those picks would obviously go to a third team in exchange for a player Cavs would get.
Or they could package those with Allen if they're in for someone making ~35M. That would be their concern.


As you can see, my primary objective is to get rid of Collins because if he's on the roster on the opening day, my enthusiasm for the upcoming season would drop exponentially.

[scott]

Game Theory podcast proposed 8 + Keldon + Branham + 35 for Garland. I’m 100% in for that, but I don’t think it gets it done… though it does perhaps shed some insight that others might overvalue Keldon because of the counting stats he puts up, not having seen his true iden y on the court as low-efficiency, low-IQ chucker.

[RC_Drunkford]

That‘s a heist. I‘d even add the Hornets pick and Tre Jones

[Payote75]

Yea some people think keldon is just a throw in but the media and some around the league actually don't. His numbers show he is a legit acquisition in a trade let alone Cleveland is got for Malaki as they did want to draft the home town product. So the trade starts from there so those two for garland numbers wise hold up very well and upside wise they haven't reached their ceiling well definitely not makaki. So from there it's a matter of value for garland and what picks and salary working etc. Im personally thinking without my spurs colored glasses that it won't take as much as some think to get garland. Also everyone fears ainge RT but spurs don't usually get raked over the coals in trade either. In one of our darkest hours when we traded kawitter we thought we got Rob and yes we should have traded him earlier but didn't turn out so bad now in hindsight no?

[CGD]

Tbh, we think that Garland's price would be way lower than it actually is.
Cavs won't trade him unless Mitc signs an extension, but if he does, then they'll want to improve their roster to actually compete and contend.
Giving them Keldon, maybe Tre and a couple of picks won't be enough.

After this draft, the only pick they all the way up until 2030 is 2026 CLE/UTA/MIN swap.
Garland and Allen trades are their only way to make the roster better.

But then again, if Garland is expensive, why not just go for a better player?
Magic will surely be interested and they got players Cavs will value way more than Keldon.

If PATFO is actually in for Garland and it's not just the usual media nonsense, we'll have to find a third team for the trade.

Imo (and I could be way off), realistic trade would be something like:
Keldon
Tre
Collins
#8 Spurs '24
Chicago '25
Charlotte '25 (I suspect they'd want a better pick, maybe something like worse off Spurs/Hawks '27, but that's up for debate)

Garland
Niang (he's on $8.5M and $8.2M for the next two years, but they hate his fat ass and want to get rid of him. Still, he can shoot and would be useful backup PF for the regular season.)

If Spurs don't want to give up Tre for Niang, then Cavs would definitely want a better pick than Charlotte '25 which won't convey.
Tre would be really useful for them as Mitc 's backup since they'd have no point guards on the roster after Garland gets traded away.

Collins and those picks would obviously go to a third team in exchange for a player Cavs would get.
Or they could package those with Allen if they're in for someone making ~35M. That would be their concern.


As you can see, my primary objective is to get rid of Collins because if he's on the roster on the opening day, my enthusiasm for the upcoming season would drop exponentially.

You keep saying this man, and I get it, but I don’t see who’s gonna come in with the WAY better trade option for Garland. Teams are lowballing them bc of the Mitc situation, the ATL guards dynamics, to a lesser extent, Garland’s post-injury play.

But set that aside, let’s looks at the options:

ORL: They ain’t moving Franz, so is a package built around Suggs and injury prone/offensive liability Jon Issac, that much better than a deal built around Keldon/24FRP and other parts? I don’t.

BYK: it’s a silly a position to take for them, but they are NOT trading Bridges. Is a deal built around Cam Johnson that much better than a Spurs deal? I don’t think so.

NOLA: the Garland-Ingram swap is probably the biggest threat for sure. But does it make sense financially for CLE really? If they trade for Ingram, who is expiring, they do that knowing they have to max him immediately. I think they’ll think long and hard about committing to THREE maxes at the same time for Mitc -Ingram-Mobley. That an expensive 5th seed.

LAL: is a package built around Rui and far off pick that much better? LOL

[CGD]

Yea some people think keldon is just a throw in but the media and some around the league actually don't. His numbers show he is a legit acquisition in a trade let alone Cleveland is got for Malaki as they did want to draft the home town product. So the trade starts from there so those two for garland numbers wise hold up very well and upside wise they haven't reached their ceiling well definitely not makaki. So from there it's a matter of value for garland and what picks and salary working etc. Im personally thinking without my spurs colored glasses that it won't take as much as some think to get garland. Also everyone fears ainge RT but spurs don't usually get raked over the coals in trade either. In one of our darkest hours when we traded kawitter we thought we got Rob and yes we should have traded him earlier but didn't turn out so bad now in hindsight no?

It didn’t turn out so bad with Kawhi bc of his injury story following the trade, but the trade itself was brutal.

But hey, if they turn Keldon, Malaki, and 8 (all tied to that trade) into Garland, it’s looks A LOT better :-)

[LeBowen]

But set that aside, let’s looks at the options

Magic: I don't think they're trading Suggs, Franz or obviously Banchero. It would probably be Anthony Black, WCJ and picks. But if they think they're one piece away, they'll offer more pick than Spurs. It's Orlando, a franchise that would be perfectly content with parennial second round exit. Adding Garland to Suggs-Franz-Banchero core would give them just that in the weak East. And to match their offer, Spurs would have to give up at least one of those Hawks picks, which won't happen.

Nets: They have Suns picks from KD trade that will be really valuable soon enough. Cam Johnson, DFS, Cam Thomas are all pieces with solid value.

Pelicans: I agree with your Ingram take, but what if Cavs ask for Trey Murphy?

Lakers: Their package is a joke.

Jazz: We keep talking about Markkanen trade, but what if they decide to go in a different direction and start competing. Their situation with the Cavs is even better than ours with the Hawks. They got all of their picks. Going for both Garland and Allen would actually be a good fit with Markkanen.

Heat: Obviously their package would be trash, but it's Riley and somehow he often manages to get his way with next to nothing.

[Payote75]

Understood but also look at first rounder from Chicago 2 second rounders and roads always lead to getting Wemby it's a giant house of cards

[CGD]

Magic: I don't think they're trading Suggs, Franz or obviously Banchero. It would probably be Anthony Black, WCJ and picks. But if they think they're one piece away, they'll offer more pick than Spurs. It's Orlando, a franchise that would be perfectly content with parennial second round exit. Adding Garland to Suggs-Franz-Banchero core would give them just that in the weak East. And to match their offer, Spurs would have to give up at least one of those Hawks picks, which won't happen.

Nets: They have Suns picks from KD trade that will be really valuable soon enough. Cam Johnson, DFS, Cam Thomas are all pieces with solid value.

Pelicans: I agree with your Ingram take, but what if Cavs ask for Trey Murphy?

Lakers: Their package is a joke.

Jazz: We keep talking about Markkanen trade, but what if they decide to go in a different direction and start competing. Their situation with the Cavs is even better than ours with the Hawks. They got all of their picks. Going for both Garland and Allen would actually be a good fit with Markkanen.

Heat: Obviously their package would be trash, but it's Riley and somehow he often manages to get his way with next to nothing.

Good stuff. I think the biggest threat is Orlando, and I’d be curious how they view Garland via-a-vis Young and even Murray.

I’m not sold on the Nets, since they’d want Garland to build WITH Bridges. And, if then the Nets offer is built around distant Suns picks, I think the Spurs would have a more appealing offer of picks (if they choose).

[SpursFan86]

Sounds like Garland might be off the table.

[Extra Stout]

Sounds like Garland might be off the table.

At least at the prices other teams are willing to pay to get him, for now. Things may come to a head later, though.

[LeBowen]

If Garland is unavailable, then Mitc is gone.

Now that trade becomes interesting. Mitc looks like he wants to play in a big market, but Cavs won't let him go for nothing.

Lakers and Heat best offers are pathetic, Nets could do it with their wings and Phoenix picks, but if Mitc actually goes there to treadmill, then he's a career loser.
I wouldn't rule out the Rockets, they have a ton of wings Cavs would want and more than enough picks.

[exstatic]

Sounds like Garland might be off the table.

At least at the prices other teams are willing to pay to get him, for now. Things may come to a head later, though.

Supposedly, Mitc does NOT want him there. I don’t think he’ll sign the extension they want him to until Garland is gone.

[Seventyniner]

The Cavs trying to act like they might keep Garland makes sense. They know they won't get anywhere close to equal value in return if they are forced to deal him.

If Mitc really wants to go to an over-the-cap team the Cavs are better suited by doing a S&T of Mitc and keeping Garland imo. To me, Mitc seems like the kind that would secure a big bag and then demand a trade a year or two later.

[CGD]

Sounds like Garland might be off the table.

Cool cool. We’ll wait for the trade deadline when his value is even lower. Give me Castle and a big swing at 8.