The Cleveland Cavaliers are in trade talks with the Los Angeles Clippers about a Darius Garland for James Harden swap.
That rumor started Monday night with a cryptic post from @MGRADS on X and was later clarified by Sports Illustrated's Chris Mannix and other reporters, including ClutchPoints' Brett Siegel and Tomer Azarly. But why would the Cavs willingly deal away a 26-year-old All-Star-caliber point guard about to enter his prime for a 36-year-old star combo guard who, despite being a former MVP and 11-time All-Star, is on the back nine of his career looking for his next payday?
That's the first question that came to mind when the rumblings picked up steam, so after some digging, here's what the logic behind the discussions could be (and why, if that's the case, Cleveland is quite misguided).
It is becoming difficult to justify Darius Garland's contract
Everybody in the Cavs' organization understands how talented and good a player Garland is, as do the majority of teams in the NBA. There's no disputing that, when healthy, he is in rarified air as a true floor general; the sticking point is the “when healthy” part of that notion. Garland has played in just 26 games this season. Initially, it was due to recovery and load management for the left great toe that he underwent surgery last June, which caused him to miss the first seven games of the campaign.
Then, just three games into his comeback, Garland reinjured it in early November against the Miami Heat and missed five straight games. When he came back from that setback, it looked like he was all good to go.
Garland suited up for 20 of Cleveland's next 23 games, averaging 18.6 points and 7.2 assists on .463/.359/.845 shooting splits. Shortening that sample size, to start 2026, he was in NBA Player of the Week consideration for the Eastern Conference. From Jan. 6-12, Garland averaged 22.5 points and dished out 7.0 assists to just 1.3 turnovers on 55.1% from the field, including a 40.0% clip from long distance.
He was beginning to look like himself and, not coincidentally, the Cavs started building winning momentum. However, once again, Garland suffered an injury in the first of a two-game series with the Philadelphia 76ers on the road. He was on another tear that night with 20 points, seven assists, three rebounds, and a steal in just 23 minutes, but then, he caught a bad break.
While on the floor, Garland put all of his upper body weight on his lower half, awkwardly positioned to try to recover a turnover. He screamed in pain and pounded the floor in frustration. Garland limped back to Cleveland's bench under his own power; it looked more annoying than it did dire. Cavs head athletic trainer Stephen Spiro examined his foot, and a reluctant Garland went back to the locker room. He did not return to the game.
On Jan. 18, Cleveland issued a press release stating that Garland suffered another sprain of the great toe, this time on his right foot. The team shared that afternoon that he would be reevaluated in 7-10 days. The only public Cavs updates since then have come from head coach Kenny Atkinson, who relayed that Garland has been on the court but with no contact.
“He's kind of day-to-day right now,” Atkinson said Jan. 26. “I can't predict whether he'll play on that trip or not. You know how things are once you've been cleared for court work, but there's a progression for that. I think sometimes, there's the injury, and then, it's like, okay, we've also got to get him prepared for an NBA match.
“I do think there's a buildup to that. So that's gonna take some time. Just usually does. You've got to go from no contact to contact with coaches, right, [then] live 1-on-1, live 2-on-2, and then we always like to build to at least some session of 5-of-5.”
After playing a career-high 75 games last year, Garland could be on his way to his fourth sub-60-game season. Even with the production he brings when he's on the floor, paying $39 million for that, then $42 million and $44 million the next two years with unknown availability, is not ideal. And it's darn near impossible to continuously improve your roster when it's in the dreaded second apron, which the Cavs are the lone team operating as such.
The difficult truth of the matter with a decaying position
Not so long ago, the Atlanta Hawks traded away the longtime face of their franchise, Trae Young, to the Washington Wizards for CJ McCollum and Corey Kispert. It was an absolute shock to the NBA world when it processed such a low return for someone who's a four-time All-Star, a former All-NBA talent, and the league's consistent top assist-getter.
McCollum at the journeymen stage of his career and a rotational forward in Kispert? No draft capital? That was it?
Perhaps it's a harbinger of what's to come for point guards. Outside of the Shai Gilgeous-Alexander, Luka Doncic, and Cade Cunningham types of the world, can you depend on one player to run an offense? Stephen Curry does it, as does Jalen Brunson; the same goes for Garland. But canvassing the rest of the league's teams with a winning record, it's a short list. Would you consider Jamal Murray or Tyrese Maxey to be a true point guard? Not really, right?
That's because the NBA has become positionless. It's a trend that started a while ago now. Wings and bigs can handle the ball, playmake, shoot, score, and defend. Multiple guards can do that too, which is why you're seeing less of a “maestro” archetype and more of a complementary backcourt approach. We're seeing skill sets work in concert rather than delegating duties. Versatility is the name of the game.
Garland can be deadly as an off-ball, spot-up partner for Donovan Mitchell and can organize at the same time. He has a special rapport with Jarrett Allen and Evan Mobley in high pick-and-roll situations, and his ability to drive, kick, probe, and manipulate is among the best in the league. But it's not as if the Cavs haven't found ways to combat his absence offensively of late.
Mitchell can play the position, though it's not advantageous for Cleveland, as he should focus on scoring without forcing the issue. Though he makes some wildly impressive passes and sets up guys well, he should be a bucket-getter first and foremost. Mobley has shown flashes as a dribble-handoff hub above the break and in the middle of the floor, with a keen sense of timing for bounce passes and over-the-top finds to cutters.
Jaylon Tyson was the primary playmaker during his time at Cal, and recently, he has shown he can facilitate at the NBA level, though he still needs to work on taking care of the ball. Craig Porter Jr.'s development stands out as a hybrid 6-foot-2 guard-forward who playmakes, crashes the glass, and makes big plays on the defensive end. He is used as a screener, gets to his spots with a unique pace, and seems to show up at the most critical times of the game. Tyrese Proctor has been better than a late-second-round pick should be, too.
Add in that the Cavs just traded for Dennis Schroder at a “lighter” $15 million contract, and it's easy to see what the team is thinking. It's less about being a “small guard” and more about his position going the way of running backs in football. The Charlotte Hornets and Memphis Grizzlies could go down the same road with LaMelo Ball and Ja Morant next.
Seeing what happened with Young, maybe it's the Cavs getting ahead of the curve.
Despite all of that, this is the wrong call
If Cleveland is set on moving on from Garland, there has to be a reason. The Cavs take swings, but they're also one of the most cerebral front offices in the NBA.
“You're gonna have to have the right group, the right leadership, you have to have a stable organization,” Atkinson said after the Ellis and Schroder trade, speaking to Cleveland's willingness to roll the dice with their younger players. “I do think we're risk-takers too, right? We're willing to swing, we're willing to bet on certain players, on young players. I think that's fun. That's the fun part of this. We're obviously calculated in our decision-making. But I love it. I love our approach and the way we go about it.”
Koby Altman, Mike Gansey, and Co. are too smart to send away Garland for Harden, and Harden alone, without something else in mind. The injury could be worse than what the team has led on. Or, maybe there is something bigger in store.
Speculation is running rampant around Giannis Antetokounmpo's future, or lack thereof, with the Milwaukee Bucks. Is Cleveland a possible destination for The Greek Freak? It would make much more sense for the Cavs to do that swap and go after Antetokounmpo to try to form some monster three-man combination of Harden, Mitchell, and Giannis. It'd also be feasible to believe Harden could get rerouted to Milwaukee in such a proposal. Let's not forget that the Cavs asked Los Angeles to pony up a 2030 first-round pick in these discussions.
Still, even with Garland's contract the way it is, and even among the injuries piling up, Cleveland should not pull the trigger on this, especially in February. We are in the middle of a season with only a couple of months left before the playoffs. Although the Wine and Gold have started off slowly, they're one of the hottest teams in the league, which is evening out as we head into the NBA All-Star break. That's not a reason to keep this thing together for the long haul, but at least for the stretch run, it deserves a chance in an undecided Eastern Conference.
Now Jarrett Allen is in trade rumors, and ESPN's Brian Windhorst is throwing out Giannis' name and Anthony Davis into the mix.
Rarely does it ever work out for a team to reshape its roster with a star and win a title in the same season. Harden has asked out with four different teams to this point in his career, and it has been based on maximizing his earnings every time. That's his prerogative, but what makes this any different with the Cavs, and why would Cleveland go for that, knowing such history? Does that lead to winning basketball when the time comes? We'll get to the fit later.
What is the difference between moving on in the summer and moving on midway through the campaign? What is the rush?
Unless this isn't about this season, and Cleveland is giving into its current predicament.
Somebody in the business told me this isn't an all-in move. It's more of an all-out admission.
And it reeks of desperation.
