dude, let's remove names for a little bit ok?Yep, get rid of Love for a potentially similar, slightly more available younger version. Get rid of Love because he's a net negative for you since LeBron left (and while he James was here, Kevin was often times net neutral). Even when he's going he's pouting and disinterested. I think Zingas could be a buy low guy, too, if he finds himself playing in an offense that moves the ball well.
And I don't think Collin is actually your best player. I think he's your best scorer but at the cost of winning basketball. His presence keeps the team from being honest with themselves on actual needs: play makers who share the ball, play defense and hit the open 3 at the wing, perimeter shooting and scoring off the bench. I also don't think he's looked at around the league like the asset you think he is.
IMO, The Cavs are forcing us to sit through an offense based on Ben Gordon or Monte Ellis while we have D-Rose/Steph Curry out there. Ben and Monte are good, but they were ultimately incongruous w/Rose or Steph.
I know you all don't believe me. You can insist that we are about to see Collin turn into next-Donovan Mitchell next year. Personally I think we missed the boat not bringing him off the bench from the start, having him earn minutes via smart basketball plays vs scoring. But Cavs gotta Cav.
you have a young player that is the best on your team, you have an over the hill player that pouts, then you want slightly-younger-slightly-available player to replace your over the hill player.
in a vacuum, you don't sacrifice your young player that happens to be the best on your team just to have the slightly-younger-slightly-available player. you attach 2nd round picks, expiring contracts or other high-value-low-cost assets to that trade, NOT your biggest bargaining chip.