Kyrie Irving (Milwaukee / Minnesota)

[Mamba Venom]

The last thing the Cavs want is picks w/ a prime 30 year old LeBron. Win now. 5 year window or a Cleveland dynasty.

[ANDW3LOVEKYRIE]

Knight / Irving Per 36 comp this season

Knight: 19.4 pts, 5.7 reb, 6.8 ast, 1.3 stl, 4.0 to on 55.8% TS age 23, $3.5M
Irving: 20.0 pts, 3.1 reb, 4.5 ast, 1.6 stl, 1.9 to on 59.9% TS age 22 $7.0M

No way that upgrade is worth a first and Larry.

Brandon Knight: PER-18.7, ORTG-104, DRTG-105, USG-26.8%, WS/48-.112
Kyrie Irving: PER-21.5, ORTG-122, DRTG-108, USG-23.1%, WS/48-.198

Kyrie is SO much better than Knight and it's not even close. He's been arguably the best and most consistent of the Big 3 on BOTH ends of the floor. We're not trading him. PERIOD.

[H2tObes]

I don't think the Cavs are interested, and I know the Bucks aren't. Sanders is playing really well and MKE has no reason to move him.

Sanders is really not playing particularly well. As good as he's been defensively, he's been worse offensively. I agree that Milwaukee should hold onto him for a while, but if he doesn't improve, at some point they should make a decision on him before his trade value plummets.

Sanders is playing very well, his value will ALWAYS be on the defensive side of the ball. He's dreadful on offense, always has been. He rebounds very well and is one of the few true defensive anchors in the league..that's why we paid him. Bucks will happily keep Sanders because his contract looks real good right about now.

[ANDW3LOVEKYRIE]

And LOL at PER 36 being used as a comparison. That's extrapolation. You can't just assume that he would play at the same level for 36 minutes. By that logic, Anthony Bennett is better than Kevin Love and Brandan Wright is the best center in the league.

[H2tObes]

And LOL at PER 36 being used as a comparison. That's extrapolation. You can't just assume that he would play at the same level for 36 minutes. By that logic, Anthony Bennett is better than Kevin Love and Brandan Wright is the best center in the league.

He's playing 34 minutes a game LOL.

[ANDW3LOVEKYRIE]

And LOL at PER 36 being used as a comparison. That's extrapolation. You can't just assume that he would play at the same level for 36 minutes. By that logic, Anthony Bennett is better than Kevin Love and Brandan Wright is the best center in the league.

He's playing 34 minutes a game LOL.

My bad but nevertheless, Kyrie is playing 38 and you can't fault him for giving you that extra 4 and a half minutes and extra production. Plus, Knight has been a below average player his entire career while Kyrie is a 2 time all star. Let's see how Knight keeps this up. Also, see my post above the last.

[Dupp]

Bucks fans hate knight but all of a sudden he has some value?


Would the bucks gm do this? Yes, come on don't kid yourself.

Cavs would pass.

Larry and our 1st is way too much for the difference between Kyrie and Knight, get real.

Not interested in trading Knight for the slightly better version of Knight, get these types of players away from my team.

Didn't notice the first as the op is really messy.



As Texas chuck said Irving and knight aren't close, let's not be deluded. I don't even like Irving much but he'd have tremendous value around the league. He's younge , locked up and very talented. Dude scores efficiently and had really fixed up his assist : turnover ratio this year.

Point being his value his a lot higher around the league than what it's seen here. He's seen as a star potential player.

[Vindicater]

Minnesota does this.

[jayjaysee]

Knight's stats might be 90% of Irving, but his game is more like 30...

But - that doesn't mean Milwaukee considers it, the fact that Sanders is still getting hate on this board is very confusing. He's had a great year and is what he was two years ago. Beyond Sanders - this team expected to be in the bottom 5 of the league for another 1-2 years.. Their pick shouldn't be on the table... If it is - then Sanders shouldn't be in the trade... Those two things don't go together.

And - doesn't mean Cleveland does either..

Cleveland would want the picks and Knight going to a third team for a better point guard. Which is simple and would easily work..

But Milwaukee isn't the team for Kyrie IMO. Pretending they'd want him - they'd need to keep Jabari/G/Sanders to make it make sense.. Which means they'd be offering 2 firsts, Knight, Henson.. Which all is of little value to Cleveland.. And doesn't really add up to something that gets a thrid team itnerested in giving up their star IMO.

[jbk1234]

Knight's stats might be 90% of Irving, but his game is more like 30...

But - that doesn't mean Milwaukee considers it, the fact that Sanders is still getting hate on this board is very confusing. He's had a great year and is what he was two years ago. Beyond Sanders - this team expected to be in the bottom 5 of the league for another 1-2 years.. Their pick shouldn't be on the table... If it is - then Sanders shouldn't be in the trade... Those two things don't go together.

And - doesn't mean Cleveland does either..

Cleveland would want the picks and Knight going to a third team for a better point guard. Which is simple and would easily work..

But Milwaukee isn't the team for Kyrie IMO. Pretending they'd want him - they'd need to keep Jabari/G/Sanders to make it make sense.. Which means they'd be offering 2 firsts, Knight, Henson.. Which all is of little value to Cleveland.. And doesn't really add up to something that gets a thrid team itnerested in giving up their star IMO.

As soon as you take Sanders out of the deal you just removed any reason for the Cavs to continue to stay on the phone. There is no reason to even continue the conversation.

[jayjaysee]

But Milwaukee isn't the team for Kyrie IMO. Pretending they'd want him - they'd need to keep Jabari/G/Sanders to make it make sense.. Which means they'd be offering 2 firsts, Knight, Henson.. Which all is of little value to Cleveland.. And doesn't really add up to something that gets a thrid team itnerested in giving up their star IMO.

As soon as you take Sanders out of the deal you just removed any reason for the Cavs to continue to stay on the phone. There is no reason to even continue the conversation.

As soon as you put Sanders in the deal you just removed any reason for the Bucks to continue to stay on the phone. There is no reason to even continue the conversation.


....really..

Not because Sanders is a "superstar", but because Sanders is realistically the only Buck that matters that is close enough to "win-now" to add Kyrie. Giannis/Parker were supposed to be tanking for Mudiay this season then being bad next year.. Then blossoming..

The team is not awful as expected thanks to Kidd/Sanders/Mayo.. Very weird to say Mayo in a positive way after the last 4 years.

I hope that logic makes sense behind the sarcasm. I do think two low protected Milwaukee firsts, Knight, and Henson wouldn't be that horrible of a "value" for kyrie .. You'd just need to find a third team to make it make sense..

[mcfly1204]

People are kidding themselves if they think Cleveland would trade Irving for anything but an All-Star caliber player.

[bondom34]

I don't think the Cavs are interested, and I know the Bucks aren't. Sanders is playing really well and MKE has no reason to move him.

Sanders is really not playing particularly well. As good as he's been defensively, he's been worse offensively. I agree that Milwaukee should hold onto him for a while, but if he doesn't improve, at some point they should make a decision on him before his trade value plummets.

But his value is on the defensive end. If he's Hibbert lite, then so be it, but that's still pretty darn solid. Kidd likes him too, so I think the decision has been made already.

[Texas Chuck]

Sanders is really not playing particularly well. As good as he's been defensively, he's been worse offensively. I agree that Milwaukee should hold onto him for a while, but if he doesn't improve, at some point they should make a decision on him before his trade value plummets.

But what you are missing is that a quality defensive big man is impacting essentially every possession on the defensive end while the same subpar offensive big man can be used to set screens or crash the O-glass or otherwise be adjusted for on the offensive end. Would it be nice if he could catch and finish like say Tyson Chandler or be a good passer like Noah? Of course it would. But his overall value should be crystal clear to the Bucks. I posted some of the defensive numbers in another thread, but its obvious that he is a huge difference maker on that end and when you combine those numbers with their actuall W/L record with and without Sanders its clear that his struggles offensively don't come anywhere close to nullifying his defensive value.

It's literally impossible for a legit defensive anchor to have enough negative value on offense to say he's not playing well. Asik in NOP is doing similar things for them. Heck even Robin Lopez who is not nearly the defender Sanders is, had a big impact on Portland.

Unless you are Shaq or maybe Boogie right now--defense matters a lot more for bigs than offense. A lot more.

[JayMKE]

Not giving up Sanders + a 1st for Irving, Irving doesn't fit what we want to do. Irving serves no purpose on the Bucks, we're not going to contend with him. That line up you have there would probably be the WOAT defensively and without a pick to improve ourselves. We don't like Knight much as our PG, we don't want super-Knight.

[jbk1234]

But Milwaukee isn't the team for Kyrie IMO. Pretending they'd want him - they'd need to keep Jabari/G/Sanders to make it make sense.. Which means they'd be offering 2 firsts, Knight, Henson.. Which all is of little value to Cleveland.. And doesn't really add up to something that gets a thrid team itnerested in giving up their star IMO.

As soon as you take Sanders out of the deal you just removed any reason for the Cavs to continue to stay on the phone. There is no reason to even continue the conversation.

As soon as you put Sanders in the deal you just removed any reason for the Bucks to continue to stay on the phone. There is no reason to even continue the conversation.


....really..

Not because Sanders is a "superstar", but because Sanders is realistically the only Buck that matters that is close enough to "win-now" to add Kyrie. Giannis/Parker were supposed to be tanking for Mudiay this season then being bad next year.. Then blossoming..

I feel like I'm arguing just to argue at this point but Kyrie is 22 and signed for many, many years.

[Narf]

Wolves could send out their 2nd, so that they are just trading down 3-7 spots with that first.

Or 2 of the lesser 2nds they've acquired. I think 2 lesser 2nds might be better value.

[mattg]

It's simple why it doesn't work for Milwaukee. Sanders defensive impact keeps the team competitive right now. You take away sanders in favor of a guard like Kyrie and the team plummets defensively, and Kyrie isn't enough to make the offense go from terrible to top tier. That means the bucks will suck, which means dealing a pick with sanders is out of the question, it doesn't make any sense. It's really not hard to understand why this proposal is built on a false premise.

[RRyder823]

I don't think the Cavs are interested, and I know the Bucks aren't. Sanders is playing really well and MKE has no reason to move him.

Sanders is really not playing particularly well. As good as he's been defensively, he's been worse offensively. I agree that Milwaukee should hold onto him for a while, but if he doesn't improve, at some point they should make a decision on him before his trade value plummets.

Even with him being so bad on O his D has been so good his value continues to increase to Bucks fan. The hang up in this deal to me is Sanders or the 1st. If we trade Knight n Sanders for Kyrie we're picking top 5. I actually like Kyrie but every team that we play is going to live in the paint against us with our lineup then and we'll need that pick.

Adversely Knight n a 1st I would do because we're pushing for the 5 seed with room to grow with Kyrie scoring, Sanders in the paint n Giannis n Parker on the wings but then the 1st holds little value to the Cavs.

As was with the Bledsoe threads in the summer it doesnt make sense to give up tons of assets for a big time point if Sanders isnt here still to patrol the paint. It just turns out to be to much of a lateral move if we do

[Ruzious]

I don't think the Cavs are interested, and I know the Bucks aren't. Sanders is playing really well and MKE has no reason to move him.

Sanders is really not playing particularly well. As good as he's been defensively, he's been worse offensively. I agree that Milwaukee should hold onto him for a while, but if he doesn't improve, at some point they should make a decision on him before his trade value plummets.

Even with him being so bad on O his D has been so good his value continues to increase to Bucks fan. The hang up in this deal to me is Sanders or the 1st. If we trade Knight n Sanders for Kyrie we're picking top 5. I actually like Kyrie but every team that we play is going to live in the paint against us with our lineup then and we'll need that pick.

Adversely Knight n a 1st I would do because we're pushing for the 5 seed with room to grow with Kyrie scoring, Sanders in the paint n Giannis n Parker on the wings but then the 1st holds little value to the Cavs.

As was with the Bledsoe threads in the summer it doesnt make sense to give up tons of assets for a big time point if Sanders isnt here still to patrol the paint. It just turns out to be to much of a lateral move if we do

Bucks fans don't make decisions for the Bucks. Nobody questions Sanders being an outstanding defensive big. The question is - Is his defense so good that it more than makes up for his terrible offense. And so far this season, it's highly questionable - as his offense has actually been worse than in prior years. Looking at the +/- stats http://www.82games.com/1415/14MIL14.HTM even with the team being much better defensively with him on the floor (7.4 points fewer allowed per 100 possessions), the offense is absurdly bad with him on the floor (12 points less scored per 100 possessions). Bottom line - the team has played significantly better with him out of the game vs him in the game.

Now, would getting Irving for Sanders help? I don't know, but Sanders ain't a kid, so I don't know if we can expect much improvement- and he does need to improve a lot if he's going to be a key for the Bucks becoming an outstanding team.