Trade Ideas - Part 2

Harper4Ferry? · Post #141 » by **Harper4Ferry?** » Thu Jun 7, 2012 4:33 am

How about Luke Walton for Emeka Okafor and the #10 pick. We get a competent starting center to pair with TT. Andy can go to the bench. We can draft MKG or Beal plus nab someone like Dion Walters, Perry Jones, or Doron Lamb at #10. Perhaps take a big or a backup PG at #24

Suddenly the rotation is

Irving
Beal or MKG
Gee
TT
Okafor

Bench of pick 24, boobie, Andy, one of the second rounders, pick 10

Tell me why that isn't a really good core to build on. Sure Okafor is overpaid, but it's only 2 years. He has been relatively injury free.

mcfly1204 · Post #142 » by **mcfly1204** » Thu Jun 7, 2012 12:46 pm

I am fine with taking on a serviceable player that has a hefty contract as long as we also net a high pick or prospect. If we were sitting at 6, 10, and 24, I would draft MKG or Barnes at 4, Lamb or Ross at 10, and then the best PF or C available at 24.

Irving/Sloan
Lamb/Gee
Barnes/Casspi
Thompson/Nicholson/Samuels
Okafor/Varejao

gflem · Post #143 » by **gflem** » Fri Jun 8, 2012 12:57 am

Harper4Ferry? wrote:How about Luke Walton for Emeka Okafor and the #10 pick. We get a competent starting center to pair with TT. Andy can go to the bench. We can draft MKG or Beal plus nab someone like Dion Walters, Perry Jones, or Doron Lamb at #10. Perhaps take a big or a backup PG at #24

Suddenly the rotation is

Irving
Beal or MKG
Gee
TT
Okafor

Bench of pick 24, boobie, Andy, one of the second rounders, pick 10

Tell me why that isn't a really good core to build on. Sure Okafor is overpaid, but it's only 2 years. He has been relatively injury free.

We are not getting Okafor and 10 for Walton.

cavshats · Post #144 » by **cavshats** » Fri Jun 8, 2012 8:13 pm

Its rumored in the wiretap they are looking to dump okafor or ariza with the number 10 pick to clear cap space.. Walton wouldnt work we would have to give them boobie and walton. I SAY DO IT!!!!!!!

tidho · Post #145 » by **tidho** » Fri Jun 8, 2012 8:45 pm

cavshats wrote:Its rumored in the wiretap they are looking to dump okafor or ariza with the number 10 pick to clear cap space.. Walton wouldnt work we would have to give them boobie and walton. I SAY DO IT!!!!!!!

So fast heads would spin.

Harper4Ferry? · Post #146 » by **Harper4Ferry?** » Sat Jun 9, 2012 2:28 am

gflem wrote:
Harper4Ferry? wrote:How about Luke Walton for Emeka Okafor and the #10 pick. We get a competent starting center to pair with TT. Andy can go to the bench. We can draft MKG or Beal plus nab someone like Dion Walters, Perry Jones, or Doron Lamb at #10. Perhaps take a big or a backup PG at #24

Suddenly the rotation is

Irving
Beal or MKG
Gee
TT
Okafor

Bench of pick 24, boobie, Andy, one of the second rounders, pick 10

Tell me why that isn't a really good core to build on. Sure Okafor is overpaid, but it's only 2 years. He has been relatively injury free.

We are not getting Okafor and 10 for Walton.

Why not? They can slide Gordon into Okafor's salary slot. I think it's reasonable for them to sell the #10 pick for 21m dollars. Leave Walton out of it, and make it pick #33 for #10 and Okafor. The owner just bought the team. Saving $20m+ would be great for the balance sheets.

gflem · Post #147 » by **gflem** » Sat Jun 9, 2012 5:23 pm

I read the wiretap, but Okafor is still a pretty good starting caliber C in the league. I am not sure what teams have the cap to acquire him, but I think if they move him and the #10 they will be receiving something of more value back than Puke Walton. Be it a late first rounder this year or a future protected first or whatever. I could be wrong, but Okafor seems to me to have more value than to have to give away the 10th pick in a deep draft just to shed salary.
I would be all for moving Puke, and Boobie for the 10th pick, add the Mia/LA pick or the Sacto pick if necessary, that wouldnt bother me at all. Cmon Grant, git er done!

RichieW · Post #148 » by **RichieW** » Sat Jun 9, 2012 11:17 pm

Spurs fan here guys, what kind of value do you guys put on the 33 and 34th picks together? Would any Spurs bench players such as DeJuan Blair/Matt Bonner be enough to get those picks? 2nd rounders are a crap shoot as much as anything, is one proven NBA player enough for a couple second rounders?

Maybe Blair + #59 for #33 and #34? We could maybe throw in a future 2nd rounder too

Would like to just guage the opinion of other teams fans

Post #149 » by **TheOUTLAW** » Sun Jun 10, 2012 11:35 am

I don't really see anything that'd be particularly enticing. While 2nd rounders are a crap shoot, the ones in the top 5 are far less of a crap shoot than the ones in the bottom 5 which almost never pan out.

gflem · Post #150 » by **gflem** » Sun Jun 10, 2012 11:11 pm

RichieW wrote:Spurs fan here guys, what kind of value do you guys put on the 33 and 34th picks together? Would any Spurs bench players such as DeJuan Blair/Matt Bonner be enough to get those picks? 2nd rounders are a crap shoot as much as anything, is one proven NBA player enough for a couple second rounders?

Maybe Blair + #59 for #33 and #34? We could maybe throw in a future 2nd rounder too

Would like to just guage the opinion of other teams fans

I wanted the team to draft Blair, but I think the team is looking to use one of the picks to pair with 24 to move up if possible, and use the other to help fill out a very thin bench. I think there will be enough NBA capable players early in the 2nd round this year that the teams with early 2nds will value them more this year than in years past.
Besides, we have Samardo Samuels who may not be as good as Blair, he does pretty much the same things as Blair does so I dont really see the fit here. The Warriors have several early 2nds and are reportedly looking to move one or more of those picks, maybe they would be a better fit for Blair.

cavshats · Post #151 » by **cavshats** » Tue Jun 19, 2012 5:52 am

anyone thought about the idea of trading down with the blazers they are super high on beal and would have to move up to 4 to get him. they have pick 6 and 11. if we traded down and the draft went the way I think it will, Davis going 1 Robinson goes 2 gilchrest goes 3, and the blazers take beal with pick 4. That leaves us either Barnes or Drummond at pick 6. And pick 11 is just icing on the cake. This draft is deep and there will be still lots of quality there. Maybe Lamb, Perry Jones, Terrance Jones, Myers Leonard, Quincy Miller,Tyler Zeller,Just to name a few that may be available and on top of that we still have pick 24.

tidho · Post #152 » by **tidho** » Tue Jun 19, 2012 12:37 pm

The prospect of getting the last available of two guys you don't really want isn't that appealing to me.
I think there is a decent (maybe 50/50) chance Barnes is available at #4. No chance he's there at #6.

To me Drummond looks like he's going to be Samual Dalembert - good player, but not worth trading down even if it does mean getting pick #11.

Realistically think Blazers would have to be ahead of Washington to get Beal too.

Niko23 · Post #153 » by **Niko23** » Tue Jun 19, 2012 6:20 pm

We would have to get assurances that Sac would not take Barnes but I think they would. Also - it is not looking like Portland will do 4 and 24 for 6 and 11, unless something drastically changes.

Post #154 » by **TheOUTLAW** » Tue Jun 19, 2012 8:54 pm

I thought that Sacramento was supposed to be very interested in Drummond?

cavshats · Post #155 » by **cavshats** » Tue Jun 19, 2012 9:12 pm

TheOUTLAW wrote:I thought that Sacramento was supposed to be very interested in Drummond?

They are said to believe he could mesh well with demarcus cousins, It would give them an extremely rare and physical frontcourt. And to the other comments I was only saying we wait until we are on the clock to make the deal, if the top 3 go in a way we do not like then we don't have to make the deal. And I can assure you almost 100% Barnes will be there at number 4. The real question is would Sac take him or Drummond at 5

KuruptedCav · Post #156 » by **KuruptedCav** » Wed Jun 20, 2012 2:49 am

How about #28 for the #33 and the right to swap 2nd round picks in 2013? The Thunder get to avoid paying out a guaranteed rookie contract and keep a pick in the range. The Cavs jump 5 spots.

Triumph36 · Post #157 » by **Triumph36** » Wed Jun 20, 2012 3:10 am

dunno why you'd include the 2013 pick swap. cavs are going to be terrible again next year (picking in the 30s) and okc is gonna be elite again (picking 55+).

okc would probably accept the 2012 swap if gilbert threw some cash their way too

thetrapman · Post #158 » by **thetrapman** » Thu Jun 21, 2012 8:48 am

I feel like we have a lot more room to be creative this draft than the last.

& therefore potentially have a better draft.

tidho · Post #159 » by **tidho** » Thu Jun 21, 2012 1:35 pm

KuruptedCav wrote:How about #28 for the #33 and the right to swap 2nd round picks in 2013? The Thunder get to avoid paying out a guaranteed rookie contract and keep a pick in the range. The Cavs jump 5 spots.

The swap next year is likely going to be 15 slots. Still I like this kind of deal. I don't think I even care to wait to see who is there at #28 - just make the deal.

soxfan2003 · Post #160 » by **soxfan2003** » Thu Jun 21, 2012 11:01 pm

Celtic fan here.

Now I don't think what I'm proposing is realistic simply because I believe the Celtics would have to agree to terms with KG (assuming he doesn't retire) and either sign or renounce Ray Allen but would Cavs fans be interested in Anderson Varejao for the 21st and 22nd picks in the draft?

Why for Cleveland? The Cavs could be real good in 3 years if they build the right way through the draft. Losing Varajao makes it a little easier to get 1-2 more good draft picks. And Varejao won't be as big of a contributor in 3 years since he will be 32. Admittedly, I am not a fan of Sullinger's potential but the Cavs might be able to draft someone like Sullinger with one of those 2 picks.

Why for Boston? Varejao could take some pressure off of KG and be that second big man defender. The Celtics could also benefit from his offensive rebounding. The 21st and 22nd picks may be able to snag one good contributor next year at a real low salary but chances are that player won't be as good as Varejao next year. And chances are those picks won't fill as big of a need.