I AM WARHOL
Veteran
I think it’s all in cause it significantly hampers there flexibility for the future. Anytime you give up control of essentially 6 first round picks (3 unprotected, 2 swaps, Ochai is a current year lottery pick), you’re going all in imo.why is this trade considered an all in move? I see it as the cavs took an opportunity to add a 25 year old star to an great young core. Garland & Mobley both are 21 and the sky is the limit for both. Allen is a 24 year old all star center. You’re way over valuing Sexton, Ochai & Markenen. The 3 1sts is the only thing debatable but if Mobley, Allen & garland continue to grow alongside Mitchell. Those picks won’t be shyt. We have our core set in stone as all of our best guys are not only young but are all stars with Mobley having the potential to be the franchise.
You’re adding a top 5 usage, 21 shots a game player to a young team with a budding PG and a potential star PF. What happens if he fukks up their development? I think this move is 2 years premature. Give Mobley time to settle into the type of player he can become. Give garland another year to build off of his all star year. And give Sexton, a player you have in house (who put up 24-3-4 on 48/37/82 splits at 22 years old) a legit shot at playing with this improved core before you give up.
This team with Mitchell is still to green to fukk with the big boys and now they have no draft capital flexibility going forward. I don’t hate the trade for Cleveland overall cause on paper Garland/Mitchell/Mobley/Allen is exciting, but I don’t think it was the savviest move for the Cavs