OT: Sensationalized wiretap headline?

[GrandAdmiralDan]

I noticed an interesting headline on the wiretap, so of course I clicked on it in order to read the full story.

The headline was "Cavs Nearly Acquired Carter From Nets"

Apart from that being interesting in general, I was interested in that from the aspect of a possible Redd trade. I was curious what the Cavs nearly gave up for Carter.

Then I read the wiretap blurb:

The Cavaliers reportedly offered the Nets Wally Szczerbiak's expiring contract in exchange for Vince Carter on Wednesday night, according to The Star-Ledger.

Rod Thorn considered the deal from Cleveland but not for very long.

How do you make the leap from THAT to "Cavs Nearly Acquired Carter From Nets" ?
I wonder who at RealGM chose that headline for the wiretap.

The actual article used a more informative and accurate headline "Carter staying after Cavs offer Szczerbiak"

Why not just use that headline rather than make up a new sensationalized headline?

[trwi7]

I really need to find the sig of the guy who made fun of the wiretap. It was hilarious. The articles they write are pretty terrible as well. Like the one after the Brewers signed Cameron in the offseason and they said Braun moving to the outfield won't help the defense very much becuase Hall isn't much of an improvement over Braun at third base.

[bucks59]

That deal itself is hilarious. The Cavs were trying to help the Nets get under the cap ....

[Kerb Hohl]

I like realGM as a site, but their writing is terrible. I still remember seeing a few years ago "'Linehart' is guaranteed to be #1 pick." Yes, the idiot wrote "Linehart" (instead of Leinart).

And then there is this:

http://knicks.realgm.com/articles/20/20080229/if_i_were_gm_of_the_knicks_this_summer.../

I get where he's trying to go, but that's just bad...

[cam2win]

I'll file this one with the "Cavs interested in Michael Redd" headline that they circulate every 10-14 days. It seems the league and media is so desperate to get Lebron a teammate that can actually play that they over state every little rumor.

Betweem Wiretap and ESPN, I'm actually growing to hate Lebron and the Cavs. I can't wait till 2010 when he's a Knick or Net and I can go back to not caring or hearing about the Cavs anymore.

[rilamann]

The Cavs despite having maybe the best individual talent in the league in Lebron James are going to be stuck in that good but not good enough to contend mode for awhile.

They dont have anyone of real vaule they can trade to aquire an all star level talent to help Lebron and as long as they have Lebron they'll never have a high enough draft pick to draft a potential all star talent.

Unless of course they get someone at like #22 and they luck out and the guy turns out to be a gem.

Also I think most NBA GMs would be very reluctant to trade a talent to the Cavs for cap relief in return.I think most everyone realizes that if you put another all star caliber talent next to Lebron it could get pretty scary for the rest of the leage.

Think about it,Lebron lead the Cavs to the Finals pretty much by himself last year and this past season damn near beat the ventual NBA Champions by himself.

Lebron James is the definition of a superstar.

If you give him some legit and help it would MJ & Pip all over agian for the rest of the league for the next 10 years.

You think for example a great basketball mind like John Hammond would send Redd to the Cavs for a ''nice piece'' and some cap relief

Hell no and neither would probably any team in the league,thank god.

.

[trwi7]

Also I think most NBA GMs would be very reluctant to trade a talent to the Cavs for cap relief in return.I think most everyone realizes that if you put another all star caliber talent next to Lebron it could get pretty scary for the rest of the leage.

This is the major point. While expiring contracts do hold some value to teams, especially ones looking to shed salary as well as taking on a big contract and needing salary filler. Most teams aren't just going to take just expirings for good players. That's the problem the Cavs are in. They have decent young players but not enough to get anybody excited to take just expirings and their decent young players for a good player.

[NeedsMoreCheese]

That deal itself is hilarious. The Cavs were trying to help the Nets get under the cap ....

I didnt even realize that at first. Hell, the cavs might as well just hand them Lebron now.

[andonewheel]

That deal itself is hilarious. The Cavs were trying to help the Nets get under the cap ....

I didnt even realize that at first. Hell, the cavs might as well just hand them Lebron now.

That's the part I found funniest. Why would the Nets trade Carter to Cleveland, when adding a player of that caliber would make Lebron more likely to stay?

And why would Cleveland help New Jersey clear salary so they can make a run at stealing their best player? Some trades are not meant to be.

I can't believe Danny Ferry is still running Cleveland. That roster is atrocious, there is no justification for being that bad. Lebron is almost being forced out. Too bad, because I hate to see the trend of superstars bolting from small market teams for nothing to major market teams; it's a terrible precedent for us.

[rilamann]

Also I think most NBA GMs would be very reluctant to trade a talent to the Cavs for cap relief in return.I think most everyone realizes that if you put another all star caliber talent next to Lebron it could get pretty scary for the rest of the leage.

This is the major point. While expiring contracts do hold some value to teams, especially ones looking to shed salary as well as taking on a big contract and needing salary filler. Most teams aren't just going to take just expirings for good players. That's the problem the Cavs are in. They have decent young players but not enough to get anybody excited to take just expirings and their decent young players for a good player.

Yea and with the Cavs I dont think NBA GMs want to improve the Cavs,Its not like Lebron would need a ton of help.You put even a guy like Redd alongside Lebron and look out.And obviously a talent for cap relef type of trade with the Cavs would make the Cavs better on the court.

If John Hammond wanted a nice piece and cap relief for Redd he could get that from a team that might jump from 40 to 45 wins with the addition of Redd.So why make a deal with the Cavs a divsision rival and make them a solid contender for the next 10 years.

And im just using the Bucks here as example I think most other teams GMs ecspecially in the east will have that type of mentality in terms of dealing with the Cavs.

The problem the Cavs ran into was that when they got Lebron they where a legit lottery team and then wernt able to aquire any additional all star caliber/potential talent via the draft or via free agency while Lebron was still on his rookie deal.Then you throw the Boozer thing into it and there isnt much hope the Cavs.

The rest of the league is damn lucky that Lebron didnt end up some on 45 win team that got hit by injuries and ended up with the #1 pick.

A great example of what im talking about would be the Spurs in 1997 when they got Duncan.Imagine if a solid playoff team got hit by the injury bug in 2003 and ended up with the #1 pick and got Lebron,thats a scary thought.

It would actually be in the League's best interest (in terms of other teams presepctives/competion standpoint) that Lebron stay in Cleveland.The league from a front office/box office/money stand point would love Lebron in NY or LA obviously.

[andonewheel]

http://basketball.realgm.com/src_wireta ... gallinari/

Gotta say, that headline is pretty hilarious in its simplicity and effectiveness. Poor NY, Isiah still haunts them.