Would the Lakers be better off waiving LeBron?

[beasted]

He has a no-trade clause, how could he possibly hold no leverage?

He holds no leverage to force the Lakers to decide to trade him. He only holds leverage on the destination if they decided on their own to trade him (which no indications say they do).

As for the trade combination you listed, Cleveland went out in the second round and with that payroll that's definitely not acceptable. If you believe that James could still defend and rebounds if he took a step back in his offensive load any trade based around Garland could be an on-paper improvement.

You think any of these 3 scenarios I mentioned which include 2-3 other players are all automatically on-paper improvements? You're either kidding me, or, I grossly misunderstand.

Garland, Hunter, Ball
Garland, Allen, Strus
Garland, Strus, Ball, Merrill

[Xiao Yao You]

There are so many moving parts to a Cavs-Lakers trade that it's bound to cause some rumors to leak out given that a 3rd team needs to be involved and draft compensation would need to be moved around.

Many would agree that this season is the Cav's best chance at a title run in years. Do you take the chance to ruin it with mid-season trade rumors involving multiple important players to that run?

We are also talking about a hypothetical as if I didn't just name the player combinations it would take. Does anyone believe any of the 4 combinations I listed makes the Cavs a better team this year?

I also disagree that Lebron holds any leverage here. He's a month away from being 41 years old, and an expiring player who also holds no power to have the Lakers include his son in any trades. Even if LeBron wants to pull a Butler, the Lakers would just tell him to stay home. They're clearly capable of staying afloat as long as there are no Luka or Reaves injuries.

This hypothetical rabbit hole is too crazy at the moment.
All likelihood is if LeBron ruins chemistry, nobody is waiving him or considering trading him. All that's going to happen is Reddick just plays him less minutes under the guise of load management.

Lebron will not be traded unless he asks for a trade. LeBron will not be waived or bought out under any circumstances.

Cavs have no title chance with their backcourt unless mobley becomes the man.

Luka and elreaves have both missed significant time already. Good luck staying afloat. They dont play in the east

[beasted]

Cavs have no title chance with their backcourt unless mobley becomes the man.

Luka and elreaves have both missed significant time already. Good luck staying afloat. They dont play in the east

And a 41 year old rental who may very well be injured come playoff time gives them a better chance?

This topic is not about whether the Cavs need a trade to make them better contenders, it's specifically whether any of the scenarios I listed involving LeBron makes them better.

I can name a bunch of trades that improve the Cavs and are cap legal and don't involve chasing a 41 year old with a NTC.

[Xiao Yao You]

He holds no leverage to force the Lakers to decide to trade him. He only holds leverage on the destination if they decided on their own to trade him (which no indications say they do).


You think any of these 3 scenarios I mentioned which include 2-3 other players are all automatically on-paper improvements? You're either kidding me, or, I grossly misunderstand.

Garland, Hunter, Ball
Garland, Allen, Strus
Garland, Strus, Ball, Merrill

There are no automatics as any team with mitchell knows. Allen i is the only one the lakers would want so i can see them rolling the dice there. Lose one starter and replace with a champion and picks

[Xiao Yao You]

And a 41 year old rental who may very well be injured come playoff time gives them a better chance?

This topic is not about whether the Cavs need a trade to make them better contenders, it's specifically whether any of the scenarios I listed involving LeBron makes them better.

I can name a bunch of trades that improve the Cavs and are cap legal and don't involve chasing a 41 year old with a NTC.

It gives them a chance. They have no chance now

[beasted]

It gives them a chance. They have no chance now

Needing LeBron to play 30+ playoff minutes at a 1st option tier of play is just as equally "no chance."

[Xiao Yao You]

Needing LeBron to play 30+ playoff minutes at a 1st option tier of play is just as equally "no chance."

Mitchell 1st option. He does little else. Lebron brings championship leadership and a little bit of everything.. id trade mitchell for a wing but thats just me

[Full Court]

It's a contract that expires after this season. LeBron also made All-NBA team last season.

Lakers really "shot themselves in the foot".

They did. Haven't gotten anywhere with LeNetNegative since the Mickey Mouse fluke. There's a reason LA didn't offer him an extension. They know. Just like Full Court knows.

[beasted]

Mitchell 1st option. He does little else. Lebron brings championship leadership and a little bit of everything.. id trade mitchell for a wing but thats just me

You're not making any sense. Are they trading for LeBron and then trading Mitchell for a wing too?

Instead of this monkey gymnastics sideshow to shoehorn LeBron, why not just use Garland and picks to get Derrick White, and significantly improve the defense and size while only having to swap one starter mid- season.

As I said, there are trades to be made that strengthen the Cavs that have nothing to do with LeBron.

[Xiao Yao You]

You're not making any sense. Are they trading for LeBron and then trading Mitchell to for a wing too?

Instead of this monkey gymnastics sideshow to shoehorn LeBron, why not just use Garland and picks to get Derrick White, and significantly improve the defense and size while only having to swap one starter mid- season.

As I said, there are trades to be made that strengthen the Cavs that have nothing to do with LeBron.

I wouldnt want mitchell or lebron. I can see the lakers and cavs doing it though if lebron is on board and cavs give him a chance at another ring which he doesnt have in la. Allen might be the best player in the league to pair with luka right now. They only give up one starter for lebron if it is your allen deal which is the only one lakers would want.

Celtics are giving up white for garland?

[Full Court]

All the discussion and hypotheticals are interesting....but let's face it. Nobody, and I mean NOBODY is trading for 40-year old Lebron on his current contract. And any team that would even consider it would be a team that there's no way Lebron would agree to a trade with.

[beasted]

I wouldnt want mitchell or lebron. I can see the lakers and cavs doing it though if lebron is on board and cavs give him a chance at another ring which he doesnt have in la. Allen might be the best player in the league to pair with luka right now. They only give up one starter for lebron if it is your allen deal which is the only one lakers would want.

Celtics are giving up white for garland?

But, it's not one starter. It's literally 2 and I told you the two salaries it would take. Why pretend like I didn't just type out the combinations it would take?

If LA only wants Allen, LeBron is not better than Hunter + Allen + (Fill in at least $20M in parts), or Garland + Allen + (Fill in $10M).

And, could I see where the Cavs use Garland and picks to to put the right package together that the Celtics are interested, especially if it includes a 3rd team? Yes, I could.

And, guess what? If the trade falls through, you only upset 1 player with the rumors instead of 3-4 rotation players.

[Real Men Wear Green]

He holds no leverage to force the Lakers to decide to trade him. He only holds leverage on the destination if they decided on their own to trade him (which no indications say they do).

He has an expiring contract and we've seen a number of examples of superstars forcing teams to trade them away when it died them. If James plays like Vince Carter did to get sent out of Toronto the Lakers aren't going to hold on. Now I'm not sure that James is the type of guy to do something like that but it's definitely been shown that players can get themselves moved.

You think any of these 3 scenarios I mentioned which include 2-3 other players are all automatically on-paper improvements? You're either kidding me, or, I grossly misunderstand.

Garland, Hunter, Ball
Garland, Allen, Strus
Garland, Strus, Ball, Merrill

If we see a James that gives good defense, 18 points, 8 boards and 8 assists and we also consider the financial benefit to the franchise Garland hunter and Ball world be a good deal for Cleveland. If course I can't promise that he's still got the ability to play great but if you believe he's still got something in the tank then he's worth it.

[Xiao Yao You]

But, it's not one starter. It's literally 2 and I told you the two salaries it would take. Why pretend like I didn't just type out the combinations it would take?

If LA only wants Allen, LeBron is not better than Hunter + Allen + (Fill in at least $10M in parts), or Garland + Allen straight up.

And, could I see where the Cavs use Garland and picks to to put the right package together that the Celtics are interested, especially if it includes a 3rd team? Yes, I could.

And, guess what? If the trade falls through, you only upset 1 player with the rumors instead of 3-4 rotation players.

Cavs have picks? With lebron you get picks. Lakers have been saving their picks for the right player. Allen is that guy

[beasted]

All the discussion and hypotheticals are interesting....but let's face it. Nobody, and I mean NOBODY is trading for 40-year old Lebron on his current contract. And any team that would even consider it would be a team that there's no way Lebron would agree to a trade with.

Basically this.

The contenders all have the apron that limits their ability to put together a package. He would have to be willing to join a team with an outside chance while hoping everything magically jells.