Clearing salaries with a Cavs Trade?

[drewd]

So would you do this trade to clear up 27 million for next year? Even if it means giving up two young players? (snow could be off the books this year, if he retires)



* I bet you that the Cavs would just buy-out Randolph contract after the trades done.

[ctorres]

Cavs would not do that deal so it doesn't matter if we would do it.

[unclebear]

NO ITS BAD ,we would be left with av and no low post threat, and they wouldnt buy out z-bo

[boomann21]

This could be the worst trade ever proposed in the history of proposing trades.

[boomann21]

and I would become a Cavs fan the next day.

[kfig5]

* I bet you that the Cavs would just buy-out Randolph contract after the trades done.

Name your stakes.

That is a ridiculous trade...and not in a good way.

And since nobody said it...

Ballboy.

[bcortell]

haha the cavs would never do that.

[Ignitowsky]

If you need attention ask mommy for milk and cookies. Not even worth commenting on.

[knicksNOTslick]

If that ever happens, Lebron just won his first championship. And he'd like to thank you for it.

[Jcrawford11]

that is the worst trade i ever saw y would we trade 4 servicable players that is a joke......nate and lee have value u dont just give them away

[mjhp911]

You forgot to ask for an unconditional first rounder in '12 on the Cavs behalf...

[HarthorneWingo]

So would you do this trade to clear up 27 million for next year? Even if it means giving up two young players? (snow could be off the books this year, if he retires)


* I bet you that the Cavs would just buy-out Randolph contract after the trades done.

Yo ballboy, go get the ball and STFU. That was utterly ridiculous. But you have succeeded in taking preposterous trade ideas to all-time low.

[duetta]

Pull out Lee and Nate and we'll talk. Otherwise, have a nice life.

[cshoops]

I thought I was alone putting up idiotic posts. Maybe we're related? lol

[cgf]

Honestly if we kept lee or nate I'd love to make the trade. Losing Curry and ZBo alongside one oyung talent for an expiring shooter and young big who can actually play d, supposedly we would have had to give up a first rounder just for the clippers to take zbo, are we really going to bitch about one young player who isn't even a future starter when we can move zbo and curry and get back something useful? I would hate to trade both lee and nate so I don't think it'd be a good trade, but if it were say just nate I'd love it. Although I doubt any team in the NBA is going to take curry and zach off our hands together.

[ITGM]

We all know it's you Isiah, just give it up already.

[randomhero423]

absolutely.

varajeo is similar to lee.

this has 0% chance of happening.

[Buckeye-NBAFan]

* I bet you that the Cavs would just buy-out Randolph contract after the trades done.

First, somehow I doubt the Cavs will pay $96M over 3 years (luxury tax + salary) for Randolph to *not* play for them.

2nd, this trade means the Cavs would have a payroll of over $130M in 2009-10. If only money grew on trees, as it apparently does in your fantasy trade land.

[livintoolive]

This is the anti-Isiah trade, if anything.

I gotta agree with you cgf. Either take out Lee or Nate or throw in 2 Cavs first rounders (or 1 if they own another crappy team's first rounder).

This would give the Knicks a payroll of 22.5 million in the coveted 10/11 season ('10 offseason) AFTER exercising the options on Chandler and Gallinari. Add in 1 top rookie contract for the Knicks' 2009 first rounder (~gallo's value) and you're at 26mn. With a cap that would probably be around 63-64 million. 28 million in salary cap space could seriously help do some damage in the free agent market.

[cgmw]

I like where this is going:
-Cavs surround Lebron with all NY's crappy players.
->NY starts over with almost nothing
->Lebron leaves Cleveland to be surrounded by nothing in NY.

Isn't it ironic? Don't ya'think.