Blazers / Cavs talking deal?

MrMisterBlunts · Post #21 » by **MrMisterBlunts** » Wed Jun 27, 2012 12:02 am

Butter wrote:
shaolin wrote:
Butter wrote:What about Batum/11 for 4, 24, + filler?

jesus f* christ

Really? #4 and a ton of cap space? What if Batum walks and the Blazers are left with nothing? They would only be left with the capspace.

In that scenario it would in essense be moving up to #4 from #11 for nothing.

I believe his issue is the plausibility of a S/T...

Wickzki · Post #22 » by **Wickzki** » Wed Jun 27, 2012 12:23 am

The Cavs willingness to trade down from #4 to #6 leads me to believe;

The Blazers want whoever is left of MKG, Beal and Robinson.
The Kings are drafting Drummond if MKG is already picked.
The Cavs are quite content with drafting Harrison Barnes and getting another piece or pieces to go with him.

GreenRiddler · Post #23 » by **GreenRiddler** » Wed Jun 27, 2012 1:04 am

Wickzki wrote:The Cavs willingness to trade down from #4 to #6 leads me to believe;

The Blazers want whoever is left of MKG, Beal and Robinson.
The Kings are drafting Drummond if MKG is already picked.
The Cavs are quite content with drafting Harrison Barnes and getting another piece or pieces to go with him.

They could still get him Cle drafts Drummond for us @4 and we Draft MKG or Barnes @6 for them then trade Barnes/MKG with Claver or Freeland and cash for Drummond.

Fitz303 · Post #24 » by **Fitz303** » Wed Jun 27, 2012 1:08 am

What this also says to me is that they may not be nearly as enamored with Lillard @6 as we're being led to believe

Wizenheimer · Post #25 » by **Wizenheimer** » Wed Jun 27, 2012 1:48 am

Fitz303 wrote:What this also says to me is that they may not be nearly as enamored with Lillard @6 as we're being led to believe

or...they are pretty sure he'll still be available at 11

Post #26 » by **kdawg32086** » Wed Jun 27, 2012 2:06 am

I think this proves that Cleveland is looking for a small forward and they're not too picky about which one it is. If we trade up to 4 (unlikely for a SF if we have Batum), that virtually ensures that the Cavs can get either MKG or Barnes at 6. I think it also could mean that we want Drummond.

Wickzki · Post #27 » by **Wickzki** » Wed Jun 27, 2012 2:15 am

GreenRiddler wrote:They could still get him Cle drafts Drummond for us @4 and we Draft MKG or Barnes @6 for them then trade Barnes/MKG with Claver or Freeland and cash for Drummond.

If MKG is on the board at #5 then the Kings draft him. If MKG is taken by the Cavs at #4 then that leaves the Kings picking Drummond over Barnes.

In no way does MKG drop past the Kings pick at #5.

In both scenarios the Cavs get Barnes, they either draft him at #4 or they trade down for him at #6. In trading up the Blazers assure themselves of MKG rather than Drummond. The Cavs pay less for Barnes than they would at #4 and get a second asset or an improved asset by moving down. The Blazers end up with their man rather than losing him to the Kings at #5.

MKG > Drummond.

Post #28 » by **kdawg32086** » Wed Jun 27, 2012 2:20 am

I think Barnes or MKG is a tossup for the Kings if they keep Evans. Evans + MKG would be incredibly painful to watch on offense. I don't even think playing with Steve Nash would help. Sac has to be well aware of that.

Clarity · Post #29 » by **Clarity** » Wed Jun 27, 2012 4:41 am

I would think if the Blazers wanted to get from 6 to 4 it wouldnt kill them to do it..

Take Harrison Barnes at 4 which frees up letting Batum go, work out a S&T situation w/ GS & have them grab Lillard for Portland then take Rivers/Lamb/Waiters at 11 to play the James Harden, 6th man role. That would upgrade your Guards/SF position a ton offensively. Your core would be dynamite w/ a ton of cap space to add the right pieces around the core of Lillard/Barnes/Aldridge.

Guys like Barnes & Lillard would make Lamarcus so much more dangerous bc of their ability to shoot the ball so well.

Clarity · Post #30 » by **Clarity** » Wed Jun 27, 2012 4:43 am

MrMisterBlunts wrote:
I believe his issue is the plausibility of a S/T...

we discussed this in another thread last wk, a S&T is more complicated in this situation, but is still very doable.

Just as much as Port cannot pay Batum anything over 8, they cannot let Batum walk & get nothing for him. Both cases would be devastating.

Run PDX · Post #31 » by **Run PDX** » Wed Jun 27, 2012 4:51 am

If its true that Cleveland is working out Terrence Ross tomorrow, there could be a deal... But, who knows if it's Portland or not. It could also be a smoke screen.

Blaze01 · Post #32 » by **Blaze01** » Wed Jun 27, 2012 4:57 am

Clarity wrote:I would think if the Blazers wanted to get from 6 to 4 it wouldnt kill them to do it..

Take Harrison Barnes at 4 which frees up letting Batum go, work out a S&T situation w/ GS & have them grab Lillard for Portland then take Rivers/Lamb/Waiters at 11 to play the James Harden, 6th man role. That would upgrade your Guards/SF position a ton offensively. Your core would be dynamite w/ a ton of cap space to add the right pieces around the core of Lillard/Barnes/Aldridge.

Guys like Barnes & Lillard would make Lamarcus so much more dangerous bc of their ability to shoot the ball so well.

Would not mind that scenario at all....

blazers73 · Post #33 » by **blazers73** » Wed Jun 27, 2012 5:11 am

Man I wish I was a fly on the wall and could listen in to the reason for moving up to #4.

Myabe Drummond has really fallen and the just take whoever is left from the tier at #6 is no longer valid. Makes a lot of sense to move up. I hope we get MKG.

portlandpilot · Post #34 » by **portlandpilot** » Wed Jun 27, 2012 5:11 am

shaolin wrote:
cucad8 wrote:because from 4, they can do 4 and loosened protection to get to 2?

Ok, that begs the question, why would they want #2?

Bradley Beal. And I love the idea of using the loosened protection as a trade chip. Its like getting good return for a pick, then getting good return for the exact same pick again.

Clarity · Post #35 » by **Clarity** » Wed Jun 27, 2012 5:16 am

blazers73 wrote:Man I wish I was a fly on the wall and could listen in to the reason for moving up to #4.

Myabe Drummond has really fallen and the just take whoever is left from the tier at #6 is no longer valid. Makes a lot of sense to move up. I hope we get MKG.

I love MKG but hate him for Portland bc he cant shoot right now.

You already have a 2 guard that cant shoot consistently adding MKG would kill Aldridge.

Norm2953 · Post #36 » by **Norm2953** » Wed Jun 27, 2012 5:28 am

The Cleveland beat writer did say Olshey and his Cleveland counterpart are very
close friends and and if Barnes' weaknesses and MKG's inability to shoot might
induce Cleveland to trade down a couple of spots. My only question would be
if Cleveland's target at six would one of the SG's like Rivers

My guess Portland's incentive to move up will be to get MKG who would provide
some of the aggression and leadership this team needs. I'm thinking such
aggression might rub off of on LA and especially Batum toughening this team up.

cucad8 · Post #37 » by **cucad8** » Wed Jun 27, 2012 5:30 am

with them working out ross, who knows, could be nothing, but he seems a great fit at 11. 11 to 4 seems to difficult, I wonder if they found a middle ground, 6 and 11 for 4,24, and?

Wickzki · Post #38 » by **Wickzki** » Wed Jun 27, 2012 5:36 am

6, 11 and Wes Matthews for 4, 24 and Anderson Varejao.

Varejao - Aldridge - Batum - MKG - ???

Not suggesting I'd do it but it works via ESPN trade machine.

deanwoof · Post #39 » by **deanwoof** » Wed Jun 27, 2012 5:49 am

Wickzki wrote:6, 11 and Wes Matthews for 4, 24 and Anderson Varejao.

Varejao - Aldridge - Batum - MKG - ???

Not suggesting I'd do it but it works via ESPN trade machine.

i like it. i've been clamoring for a andy for wes trade.

could still sign dragic, but doubtful. or maybe trade for kendall marshall?

Post #40 » by **DeBlazerRiddem** » Wed Jun 27, 2012 6:08 am

I don't get why people think Kidd-Gilchrist would be a good fit with us.

Sure he has nice intangibles, but his skillset isn't something we are in dire need of. We had Gerald Wallace - who is supposed to be a comparison and it didn't bring a new dimension to our team or take us to another level. We have other needs such as a play creator, perimeter scorer, and defensive anchor, at least one of which needs to be all-star quality.