Trade Ideas

[LivingLegend]

Read on Twitter

?s=21

This is going to sound ridiculous and I will get flamed into the nether realm for saying--buuuut. I think Rubio has more value to the Cavs than Sexton does. Regardless of cost.

JB can say all of the coach speak he wants, but Sexton/LeVerts skillsets overlap quite a bit, LeVert is just a normal sized SG and Sexton is undersized.

Because of this, I would much rather have the Cavs focus on bringing Rubio back on a 3/45M contract than pay Sexton 4/110M if the plan is to keep LeVert.

Levert/Osman/Rubio >>> Levert/Sexton IMO. You can then flip Sexton in a S&T to recoup draft picks and keep building the depth at the end of the bench.

Flame away.

[JonFromVA]

Read on Twitter

?s=21

I sure hope they've explained that to Collin and perhaps even to Ricky because while I still see a clear spot and role for Ricky next season NBA players often calculate things differently and prefer not to see a potential road block on the roster to them getting playing time.

As for our salary situation, Cedi is under contract for another couple seasons. Sportac has us $21.4M under the luxury tax next year and even if we extend Caris, his new contract wouldn't go in to effect until the following season. So, if we can get everyone we wanted signed up and stay under the tax level, cool, but otherwise Altman will just need to make the case that we just heard from JBB - that all those players actually do have an important role on the team moving forward and presumably DG will cut the checks.

Anyway, there are lots of tests for a GM, and Altman will surely be tested trying to manage the cap, player's salaries, and Klutch. The Cavs supposedly have a great relationship with Rich Paul, but that didn't stop him from holding out Thompson and Smith just to get them paid a little bit more.

[Revenged25]

Read on Twitter

?s=21

This is going to sound ridiculous and I will get flamed into the nether realm for saying--buuuut. I think Rubio has more value to the Cavs than Sexton does. Regardless of cost.

JB can say all of the coach speak he wants, but Sexton/LeVerts skillsets overlap quite a bit, LeVert is just a normal sized SG and Sexton is undersized.

Because of this, I would much rather have the Cavs focus on bringing Rubio back on a 3/45M contract than pay Sexton 4/110M if the plan is to keep LeVert.

Levert/Osman/Rubio >>> Levert/Sexton IMO.

Flame away.

Less flame, but just pointing out you're picking the less efficient player who is equally bad defensively, but older and even more injury prone just because he's 5 inches taller. Like if he was actually decent defensively sure you can accept the lesser efficiency for improved defense, but he's just as bad defensively and not as good offensively, while once again being more injury prone.

I think with LeVert on the roster, what Rubio brings is more important than what Sexton does because he's a much better facilitator and LeVert provides a secondary ball handler/self-sufficient scorer that Sexton is. But Sexton/Rubio are completely different players so you obviously would need to find the player that fits better with the skillset you need. The question becomes if you had Garland and Rubio as your primary ball handlers/facilitators, and could have LeVert/Sexton signed for similar contracts, would you prefer the guy that's 5 inches taller, just as bad defensively, less efficient scoring, more injury prone, though also a better passer CURRENTLY at 27 and 4 more years in the NBA (was just about the same as Sexton early on), or the younger, more efficient, less injury prone, just as bad defensively, 5 inches shorter, and CURRENTLY a slightly worse passer being 5 years younger with 4 less years in the NBA.

[jbk1234]

Read on Twitter

?s=21

This is going to sound ridiculous and I will get flamed into the nether realm for saying--buuuut. I think Rubio has more value to the Cavs than Sexton does. Regardless of cost.

JB can say all of the coach speak he wants, but Sexton/LeVerts skillsets overlap quite a bit, LeVert is just a normal sized SG and Sexton is undersized.

Because of this, I would much rather have the Cavs focus on bringing Rubio back on a 3/45M contract than pay Sexton 4/110M if the plan is to keep LeVert.

Levert/Osman/Rubio >>> Levert/Sexton IMO. You can then flip Sexton in a S&T to recoup draft picks and keep building the depth at the end of the bench.

Flame away.

If he's physically the same as he was before his injury, I think Rubio has move value than either LeVert or Sexton. But who know, perhaps I'll be presently surprised by LeVert. The Cavs are 54 games into an 82 game season. Then the playoffs will arrive. There's a lot of basketball left to be played before the Cavs have to, or even can, make a long-term decision on any of these guys. LeVert's performance, Rubio's willingness to return, the offers the Cavs get on Sexton at the deadline, and the offers Sexton gets this summer, should all inform the Cavs decision.

There should be no fate accomplis here. None of these guys are presently *that guy.*

[LivingLegend]

Read on Twitter

?s=21

This is going to sound ridiculous and I will get flamed into the nether realm for saying--buuuut. I think Rubio has more value to the Cavs than Sexton does. Regardless of cost.

JB can say all of the coach speak he wants, but Sexton/LeVerts skillsets overlap quite a bit, LeVert is just a normal sized SG and Sexton is undersized.

Because of this, I would much rather have the Cavs focus on bringing Rubio back on a 3/45M contract than pay Sexton 4/110M if the plan is to keep LeVert.

Levert/Osman/Rubio >>> Levert/Sexton IMO.

Flame away.

Less flame, but just pointing out you're picking the less efficient player who is equally bad defensively, but older and even more injury prone just because he's 5 inches taller. Like if he was actually decent defensively sure you can accept the lesser efficiency for improved defense, but he's just as bad defensively and not as good offensively, while once again being more injury prone.

I think with LeVert on the roster, what Rubio brings is more important than what Sexton does because he's a much better facilitator and LeVert provides a secondary ball handler/self-sufficient scorer that Sexton is. But Sexton/Rubio are completely different players so you obviously would need to find the player that fits better with the skillset you need. The question becomes if you had Garland and Rubio as your primary ball handlers/facilitators, and could have LeVert/Sexton signed for similar contracts, would you prefer the guy that's 5 inches taller, just as bad defensively, less efficient scoring, more injury prone, though also a better passer CURRENTLY at 27 and 4 more years in the NBA (was just about the same as Sexton early on), or the younger, more efficient, less injury prone, just as bad defensively, 5 inches shorter, and CURRENTLY a slightly worse passer being 5 years younger with 4 less years in the NBA.

In not saying I agree with signing Levert over Sexton longterm, I just recognize thats whats going to happen. The Cavs dont trade for players that they dont sign longterm (ex: Lauri/Allen) and reports are out there already that the Cavs view him as a longterm piece they want to lock up. So knowing that LeVert is highly likely to be signed lonterm, that leaves Sexton/Cedi/Rubio and others with less money to be taken care of. Cant have em all (I dont think at least)

Either way, that has no relation to the fact that I think Rubio is more important to success of the Cavs than Sexton is lol

Would you be more comfortable giving 3/45 to Rubio or 4/110 to Sexton? Knowing you have LeVert?

I personally would give 3/45 to Rubio first regardless of the LeVert situation. I truely think he is a 'raises all ships' type of player and finding a similar enough player with Sextons skillet is far easier for MUCH cheaper than what he is asking for through the draft/FA.

EX: You could sign somebody like.....Malcom Brogdon for 4/65 who does Collin Sexton better than Collin Sexton does Collin Sexton.

[JonFromVA]

Read on Twitter

?s=21

This is going to sound ridiculous and I will get flamed into the nether realm for saying--buuuut. I think Rubio has more value to the Cavs than Sexton does. Regardless of cost.

JB can say all of the coach speak he wants, but Sexton/LeVerts skillsets overlap quite a bit, LeVert is just a normal sized SG and Sexton is undersized.

Because of this, I would much rather have the Cavs focus on bringing Rubio back on a 3/45M contract than pay Sexton 4/110M if the plan is to keep LeVert.

Levert/Osman/Rubio >>> Levert/Sexton IMO. You can then flip Sexton in a S&T to recoup draft picks and keep building the depth at the end of the bench.

Flame away.

Well, unless Still returns under another name, you're probably safe because based on the numbers and what we saw last season, what you said can't be argued with. Rubio was amazingly good for the Cavs, but he just suffered his second ACL tear on the same knee.

The case for Collin is based on projection/hope and the fact his surgery was relatively minor while Ricky's was relatively major. We kind of presume he will be ok because his game is not based so much on speed, but unfortunately there is a point of no return where losing even just little bit of athleticism is too much.

In addition, Ricky is likely to miss a fair chunk of the the beginning of next season. If a team wants to sign him this Summer, they'll being doing so without really knowing what kind of player he will be. So, the Cavs shouldn't have a lot of competition if they're interested in signing Ricky this Summer and rolling the dice on his eventual recovery.

As for Collin, there's always a chance a team will decide he's the guy they want to spend all their cap space on; but there's another scenario where he flies under the radar and simply doesn't get any serious offers. Rather than S&T to another team like the Bulls did with Lauri just so he could get something over the MLE, maybe Collin returns for a deal starting as low as $15M.

But again, role comes in to play. If that other team is offering Collin their starting PG spot .vs. the Cavs who are just promising to get him in the mix ... Klutch is presumably going to make our lives miserable.

Which is why we should be considering what we can get for Collin now ...

[toooskies]

This is going to sound ridiculous and I will get flamed into the nether realm for saying--buuuut. I think Rubio has more value to the Cavs than Sexton does. Regardless of cost.

JB can say all of the coach speak he wants, but Sexton/LeVerts skillsets overlap quite a bit, LeVert is just a normal sized SG and Sexton is undersized.

Because of this, I would much rather have the Cavs focus on bringing Rubio back on a 3/45M contract than pay Sexton 4/110M if the plan is to keep LeVert.

Levert/Osman/Rubio >>> Levert/Sexton IMO.

Flame away.

Less flame, but just pointing out you're picking the less efficient player who is equally bad defensively, but older and even more injury prone just because he's 5 inches taller. Like if he was actually decent defensively sure you can accept the lesser efficiency for improved defense, but he's just as bad defensively and not as good offensively, while once again being more injury prone.

I think with LeVert on the roster, what Rubio brings is more important than what Sexton does because he's a much better facilitator and LeVert provides a secondary ball handler/self-sufficient scorer that Sexton is. But Sexton/Rubio are completely different players so you obviously would need to find the player that fits better with the skillset you need. The question becomes if you had Garland and Rubio as your primary ball handlers/facilitators, and could have LeVert/Sexton signed for similar contracts, would you prefer the guy that's 5 inches taller, just as bad defensively, less efficient scoring, more injury prone, though also a better passer CURRENTLY at 27 and 4 more years in the NBA (was just about the same as Sexton early on), or the younger, more efficient, less injury prone, just as bad defensively, 5 inches shorter, and CURRENTLY a slightly worse passer being 5 years younger with 4 less years in the NBA.

In not saying I agree with signing Levert over Sexton longterm, I just recognize thats whats going to happen. The Cavs dont trade for players that they dont sign longterm (ex: Lauri/Allen) and reports are out there already that the Cavs view him as a longterm piece they want to lock up. So knowing that LeVert is highly likely to be signed lonterm, that leaves Sexton/Cedi/Rubio and others with less money to be taken care of. Cant have em all (I dont think at least)

Either way, that has no relation to the fact that I think Rubio is more important to success of the Cavs than Sexton is lol

Would you be more comfortable giving 3/45 to Rubio or 4/110 to Sexton? Knowing you have LeVert?

I personally would give 3/45 to Rubio first regardless of the LeVert situation. I truely think he is a 'raises all ships' type of player and finding a similar enough player with Sextons skillet is far easier for MUCH cheaper than what he is asking for through the draft/FA.

EX: You could sign somebody like.....Malcom Brogdon for 4/65 who does Collin Sexton better than Collin Sexton does Collin Sexton.

I'm pretty sure we need to renounce Sexton to even offer the full MLE to Rubio unless Sexton accepts the QO. My guess would be that we offer a two-year deal for Rubio on the TPMLE (roughly $6m/year) with the second year being a player option, and then raise the offer if we decide to let Sexton walk for nothing.

[JonFromVA]

This is going to sound ridiculous and I will get flamed into the nether realm for saying--buuuut. I think Rubio has more value to the Cavs than Sexton does. Regardless of cost.

JB can say all of the coach speak he wants, but Sexton/LeVerts skillsets overlap quite a bit, LeVert is just a normal sized SG and Sexton is undersized.

Because of this, I would much rather have the Cavs focus on bringing Rubio back on a 3/45M contract than pay Sexton 4/110M if the plan is to keep LeVert.

Levert/Osman/Rubio >>> Levert/Sexton IMO.

Flame away.

Less flame, but just pointing out you're picking the less efficient player who is equally bad defensively, but older and even more injury prone just because he's 5 inches taller. Like if he was actually decent defensively sure you can accept the lesser efficiency for improved defense, but he's just as bad defensively and not as good offensively, while once again being more injury prone.

I think with LeVert on the roster, what Rubio brings is more important than what Sexton does because he's a much better facilitator and LeVert provides a secondary ball handler/self-sufficient scorer that Sexton is. But Sexton/Rubio are completely different players so you obviously would need to find the player that fits better with the skillset you need. The question becomes if you had Garland and Rubio as your primary ball handlers/facilitators, and could have LeVert/Sexton signed for similar contracts, would you prefer the guy that's 5 inches taller, just as bad defensively, less efficient scoring, more injury prone, though also a better passer CURRENTLY at 27 and 4 more years in the NBA (was just about the same as Sexton early on), or the younger, more efficient, less injury prone, just as bad defensively, 5 inches shorter, and CURRENTLY a slightly worse passer being 5 years younger with 4 less years in the NBA.

In not saying I agree with signing Levert over Sexton longterm, I just recognize thats whats going to happen. The Cavs dont trade for players that they dont sign longterm (ex: Lauri/Allen) and reports are out there already that the Cavs view him as a longterm piece they want to lock up. So knowing that LeVert is highly likely to be signed lonterm, that leaves Sexton/Cedi/Rubio and others with less money to be taken care of. Cant have em all (I dont think at least)

Either way, that has no relation to the fact that I think Rubio is more important to success of the Cavs than Sexton is lol

Would you be more comfortable giving 3/45 to Rubio or 4/110 to Sexton? Knowing you have LeVert?

I personally would give 3/45 to Rubio first regardless of the LeVert situation. I truely think he is a 'raises all ships' type of player and finding a similar enough player with Sextons skillet is far easier for MUCH cheaper than what he is asking for through the draft/FA.

EX: You could sign somebody like.....Malcom Brogdon for 4/65 who does Collin Sexton better than Collin Sexton does Collin Sexton.

We're going to be over the salary cap next season and we gave up our Bird rights on Ricky, so, the most we can offer Ricky would be an MLE contract and that may turn out to be the tax payer MLE because of our cap holds.

So, re-calibrate your thinking around Ricky getting something like 3/19, and we can't sign Brogdon (not a free agent and will make too much), but we could trade for him.

[Revenged25]

In not saying I agree with signing Levert over Sexton longterm, I just recognize thats whats going to happen. The Cavs dont trade for players that they dont sign longterm (ex: Lauri/Allen) and reports are out there already that the Cavs view him as a longterm piece they want to lock up. So knowing that LeVert is highly likely to be signed lonterm, that leaves Sexton/Cedi/Rubio and others with less money to be taken care of. Cant have em all (I dont think at least)

Either way, that has no relation to the fact that I think Rubio is more important to success of the Cavs than Sexton is lol

Would you be more comfortable giving 3/45 to Rubio or 4/110 to Sexton? Knowing you have LeVert?

I personally would give 3/45 to Rubio first regardless of the LeVert situation. I truely think he is a 'raises all ships' type of player and finding a similar enough player with Sextons skillet is far easier for MUCH cheaper than what he is asking for through the draft/FA.

EX: You could sign somebody like.....Malcom Brogdon for 4/65 who does Collin Sexton better than Collin Sexton does Collin Sexton.

We're going to be over the salary cap next season and we gave up our Bird rights on Ricky, so, the most we can offer Ricky would be an MLE contract and that may turn out to be the tax payer MLE because of our cap holds.

So, re-calibrate your thinking around Ricky getting something like 3/19, and we can't sign Brogdon (not a free agent and will make too much), but we could trade for him.

Also how are you going to sign someone like Malcolm Brogdon for 4/65 when Brogdon signed 4/85 just 2 years ago? So you can't get someone like Brogdon for 4/65 even if he was a FA, it's going to cost you a lot more than that considering his 4/85 price would be even more if he signed this year instead with cap increasing etc.

[LivingLegend]

Read on Twitter

?s=21

This is going to sound ridiculous and I will get flamed into the nether realm for saying--buuuut. I think Rubio has more value to the Cavs than Sexton does. Regardless of cost.

JB can say all of the coach speak he wants, but Sexton/LeVerts skillsets overlap quite a bit, LeVert is just a normal sized SG and Sexton is undersized.

Because of this, I would much rather have the Cavs focus on bringing Rubio back on a 3/45M contract than pay Sexton 4/110M if the plan is to keep LeVert.

Levert/Osman/Rubio >>> Levert/Sexton IMO. You can then flip Sexton in a S&T to recoup draft picks and keep building the depth at the end of the bench.

Flame away.

Well, unless Still returns under another name, you're probably safe because based on the numbers and what we saw last season, what you said can't be argued with. Rubio was amazingly good for the Cavs, but he just suffered his second ACL tear on the same knee.

The case for Collin is based on projection/hope and the fact his surgery was relatively minor while Ricky's was relatively major. We kind of presume he will be ok because his game is not based so much on speed, but unfortunately there is a point of no return where losing even just little bit of athleticism is too much.

In addition, Ricky is likely to miss a fair chunk of the the beginning of next season. If a team wants to sign him this Summer, they'll being doing so without really knowing what kind of player he will be. So, the Cavs shouldn't have a lot of competition if they're interested in signing Ricky this Summer and rolling the dice on his eventual recovery.

As for Collin, there's always a chance a team will decide he's the guy they want to spend all their cap space on; but there's another scenario where he flies under the radar and simply doesn't get any serious offers. Rather than S&T to another team like the Bulls did with Lauri just so he could get something over the MLE, maybe Collin returns for a deal starting as low as $15M.

But again, role comes in to play. If that other team is offering Collin their starting PG spot .vs. the Cavs who are just promising to get him in the mix ... Klutch is presumably going to make our lives miserable.

Which is why we should be considering what we can get for Collin now ...

With him signing with Klutch---I smell a Nerlens Noel situation. The Cavs are going to offer him something he things is under the market (like 4/75), they will decline, no other team will want him for his asking price and he will have to sign a 1-2 years prove it deal that pisses everybody off.

Rich Paul knows how to handle big name clients and manage egos on championship contenders. I question his ability to manage the 2nd or 3rd tier level players by trying to overvalue everything and play way too much hard ball.

[LivingLegend]

We're going to be over the salary cap next season and we gave up our Bird rights on Ricky, so, the most we can offer Ricky would be an MLE contract and that may turn out to be the tax payer MLE because of our cap holds.

So, re-calibrate your thinking around Ricky getting something like 3/19, and we can't sign Brogdon (not a free agent and will make too much), but we could trade for him.

Also how are you going to sign someone like Malcolm Brogdon for 4/65 when Brogdon signed 4/85 just 2 years ago? So you can't get someone like Brogdon for 4/65 even if he was a FA, it's going to cost you a lot more than that considering his 4/85 price would be even more if he signed this year instead with cap increasing etc.

lol I just threw Brogdons name out as an example of the type of guy you could get to replace Sextons role MUCH cheaper than what Sexton is asking for. Didnt mean to start a full on hypothetical with it.

I just meant that Sextons skillset isnt particularly difficult to find--and I threw out the most random player I could think of and landed on Malcom Brogdon.

[jbk1234]

This is going to sound ridiculous and I will get flamed into the nether realm for saying--buuuut. I think Rubio has more value to the Cavs than Sexton does. Regardless of cost.

JB can say all of the coach speak he wants, but Sexton/LeVerts skillsets overlap quite a bit, LeVert is just a normal sized SG and Sexton is undersized.

Because of this, I would much rather have the Cavs focus on bringing Rubio back on a 3/45M contract than pay Sexton 4/110M if the plan is to keep LeVert.

Levert/Osman/Rubio >>> Levert/Sexton IMO.

Flame away.

Less flame, but just pointing out you're picking the less efficient player who is equally bad defensively, but older and even more injury prone just because he's 5 inches taller. Like if he was actually decent defensively sure you can accept the lesser efficiency for improved defense, but he's just as bad defensively and not as good offensively, while once again being more injury prone.

I think with LeVert on the roster, what Rubio brings is more important than what Sexton does because he's a much better facilitator and LeVert provides a secondary ball handler/self-sufficient scorer that Sexton is. But Sexton/Rubio are completely different players so you obviously would need to find the player that fits better with the skillset you need. The question becomes if you had Garland and Rubio as your primary ball handlers/facilitators, and could have LeVert/Sexton signed for similar contracts, would you prefer the guy that's 5 inches taller, just as bad defensively, less efficient scoring, more injury prone, though also a better passer CURRENTLY at 27 and 4 more years in the NBA (was just about the same as Sexton early on), or the younger, more efficient, less injury prone, just as bad defensively, 5 inches shorter, and CURRENTLY a slightly worse passer being 5 years younger with 4 less years in the NBA.

In not saying I agree with signing Levert over Sexton longterm, I just recognize thats whats going to happen. The Cavs dont trade for players that they dont sign longterm (ex: Lauri/Allen) and reports are out there already that the Cavs view him as a longterm piece they want to lock up. So knowing that LeVert is highly likely to be signed lonterm, that leaves Sexton/Cedi/Rubio and others with less money to be taken care of. Cant have em all (I dont think at least)

Either way, that has no relation to the fact that I think Rubio is more important to success of the Cavs than Sexton is lol

Would you be more comfortable giving 3/45 to Rubio or 4/110 to Sexton? Knowing you have LeVert?

I personally would give 3/45 to Rubio first regardless of the LeVert situation. I truely think he is a 'raises all ships' type of player and finding a similar enough player with Sextons skillet is far easier for MUCH cheaper than what he is asking for through the draft/FA.

EX: You could sign somebody like.....Malcom Brogdon for 4/65 who does Collin Sexton better than Collin Sexton does Collin Sexton.

The idea that the Cavs will extend LeVert this summer, no matter what, regardless of how well he plays or fits on this roster, suggests a level of incompetence that I just don't believe the Cavs F.O. is handicapped by. If the results are good, he'll get extended. If the results are bad, he won't. If the results are mixed, they'll have a decision to make.

[jbk1234]

We're going to be over the salary cap next season and we gave up our Bird rights on Ricky, so, the most we can offer Ricky would be an MLE contract and that may turn out to be the tax payer MLE because of our cap holds.

So, re-calibrate your thinking around Ricky getting something like 3/19, and we can't sign Brogdon (not a free agent and will make too much), but we could trade for him.

Also how are you going to sign someone like Malcolm Brogdon for 4/65 when Brogdon signed 4/85 just 2 years ago? So you can't get someone like Brogdon for 4/65 even if he was a FA, it's going to cost you a lot more than that considering his 4/85 price would be even more if he signed this year instead with cap increasing etc.

And I wouldn't trade for him because the Pacers have murdered more people this deadline than Jack the Ripper.

[Revenged25]

We're going to be over the salary cap next season and we gave up our Bird rights on Ricky, so, the most we can offer Ricky would be an MLE contract and that may turn out to be the tax payer MLE because of our cap holds.

So, re-calibrate your thinking around Ricky getting something like 3/19, and we can't sign Brogdon (not a free agent and will make too much), but we could trade for him.

Also how are you going to sign someone like Malcolm Brogdon for 4/65 when Brogdon signed 4/85 just 2 years ago? So you can't get someone like Brogdon for 4/65 even if he was a FA, it's going to cost you a lot more than that considering his 4/85 price would be even more if he signed this year instead with cap increasing etc.

lol I just threw Brogdons name out as an example of the type of guy you could get to replace Sextons role MUCH cheaper than what Sexton is asking for. Didnt mean to start a full on hypothetical with it.

I just meant that Sextons skillset isnt particularly difficult to find--and I threw out the most random player I could think of and landed on Malcom Brogdon.

Except is that really that much cheaper? Also you can't find what Sexton provides at his level of efficiency easily. Those that are get paid, those that aren't don't.

[toooskies]

In not saying I agree with signing Levert over Sexton longterm, I just recognize thats whats going to happen. The Cavs dont trade for players that they dont sign longterm (ex: Lauri/Allen) and reports are out there already that the Cavs view him as a longterm piece they want to lock up. So knowing that LeVert is highly likely to be signed lonterm, that leaves Sexton/Cedi/Rubio and others with less money to be taken care of. Cant have em all (I dont think at least)

Either way, that has no relation to the fact that I think Rubio is more important to success of the Cavs than Sexton is lol

Would you be more comfortable giving 3/45 to Rubio or 4/110 to Sexton? Knowing you have LeVert?

I personally would give 3/45 to Rubio first regardless of the LeVert situation. I truely think he is a 'raises all ships' type of player and finding a similar enough player with Sextons skillet is far easier for MUCH cheaper than what he is asking for through the draft/FA.

EX: You could sign somebody like.....Malcom Brogdon for 4/65 who does Collin Sexton better than Collin Sexton does Collin Sexton.

We're going to be over the salary cap next season and we gave up our Bird rights on Ricky, so, the most we can offer Ricky would be an MLE contract and that may turn out to be the tax payer MLE because of our cap holds.

So, re-calibrate your thinking around Ricky getting something like 3/19, and we can't sign Brogdon (not a free agent and will make too much), but we could trade for him.

If Rubio signs for three years on the NTMLE, he's crazy. He won't know how long it will take to come all the way back from his knee, but by the 2023 offseason he should be nearing full health and wanting at least a full MLE paycheck.

Much more likely to take a 1-year deal on the TP MLE, or a 2-year deal with a PO on the second year, so he can get a raise when he's fully back from the ACL tear. Lots of teams have cap room in 2023 so he'll have options. Also makes sense from the Cavs' perspective to mitigate long-term risk that he never comes back fully from injury. The Cavs can retain Goodwin in the Pangos "third PG" role, even though he'll probably get minutes throughout the year (depending on LeVert and Sexton).

[LivingLegend]

Less flame, but just pointing out you're picking the less efficient player who is equally bad defensively, but older and even more injury prone just because he's 5 inches taller. Like if he was actually decent defensively sure you can accept the lesser efficiency for improved defense, but he's just as bad defensively and not as good offensively, while once again being more injury prone.

I think with LeVert on the roster, what Rubio brings is more important than what Sexton does because he's a much better facilitator and LeVert provides a secondary ball handler/self-sufficient scorer that Sexton is. But Sexton/Rubio are completely different players so you obviously would need to find the player that fits better with the skillset you need. The question becomes if you had Garland and Rubio as your primary ball handlers/facilitators, and could have LeVert/Sexton signed for similar contracts, would you prefer the guy that's 5 inches taller, just as bad defensively, less efficient scoring, more injury prone, though also a better passer CURRENTLY at 27 and 4 more years in the NBA (was just about the same as Sexton early on), or the younger, more efficient, less injury prone, just as bad defensively, 5 inches shorter, and CURRENTLY a slightly worse passer being 5 years younger with 4 less years in the NBA.

In not saying I agree with signing Levert over Sexton longterm, I just recognize thats whats going to happen. The Cavs dont trade for players that they dont sign longterm (ex: Lauri/Allen) and reports are out there already that the Cavs view him as a longterm piece they want to lock up. So knowing that LeVert is highly likely to be signed lonterm, that leaves Sexton/Cedi/Rubio and others with less money to be taken care of. Cant have em all (I dont think at least)

Either way, that has no relation to the fact that I think Rubio is more important to success of the Cavs than Sexton is lol

Would you be more comfortable giving 3/45 to Rubio or 4/110 to Sexton? Knowing you have LeVert?

I personally would give 3/45 to Rubio first regardless of the LeVert situation. I truely think he is a 'raises all ships' type of player and finding a similar enough player with Sextons skillet is far easier for MUCH cheaper than what he is asking for through the draft/FA.

EX: You could sign somebody like.....Malcom Brogdon for 4/65 who does Collin Sexton better than Collin Sexton does Collin Sexton.

The idea that the Cavs will extend LeVert this summer, no matter what, regardless of how well he plays or fits on this roster, suggests a level of incompetence that I just don't believe the Cavs F.O. is handicapped by. If the results are good, he'll get extended. If the results are bad, he won't. If the results are mixed, they'll have a decision to make.

You have been adamant about this. The Caris Levert hate strongggg

I could care less either way, they are going to retain talent one way or another--im just reading the writing on the wall.

Lauri Markenen constantly hampered by injures too in Chicago and had major questions with his defense (among other things)? The Cavs still locked him up before he even played a game with us lol

I remember you loving the LM trade (i think that was you), whats so different about LeVerts situation?

[LivingLegend]

Also how are you going to sign someone like Malcolm Brogdon for 4/65 when Brogdon signed 4/85 just 2 years ago? So you can't get someone like Brogdon for 4/65 even if he was a FA, it's going to cost you a lot more than that considering his 4/85 price would be even more if he signed this year instead with cap increasing etc.

lol I just threw Brogdons name out as an example of the type of guy you could get to replace Sextons role MUCH cheaper than what Sexton is asking for. Didnt mean to start a full on hypothetical with it.

I just meant that Sextons skillset isnt particularly difficult to find--and I threw out the most random player I could think of and landed on Malcom Brogdon.

Except is that really that much cheaper? Also you can't find what Sexton provides at his level of efficiency easily. Those that are get paid, those that aren't don't.

I mean Sexton is reportedly asking for 100-120M and he now has Rich Paul..I doubt that number is going to come down much.

So yeah, a guy like Brogdan for 65M would be significantly cheaper.

Collin has great efficiency--however he also has so many black holes in his game that it sort of brings back to earth what hes good at. Its like yeah hes really good at this one thing, but hes really bad at these 4 other things.

[Revenged25]

lol I just threw Brogdons name out as an example of the type of guy you could get to replace Sextons role MUCH cheaper than what Sexton is asking for. Didnt mean to start a full on hypothetical with it.

I just meant that Sextons skillset isnt particularly difficult to find--and I threw out the most random player I could think of and landed on Malcom Brogdon.

Except is that really that much cheaper? Also you can't find what Sexton provides at his level of efficiency easily. Those that are get paid, those that aren't don't.

I mean Sexton is reportedly asking for 100-120M and he now has Rich Paul..I doubt that number is going to come down much.

so yeah, a guy like Brogdan for 65M would be significantly cheaper.

EXCEPT YOU CAN'T GET A GUY LIKE BROGDAN FOR 65M. BROGDAN HIMSELF SIGNED FOR 85M A FEW YEARS AGO!

[jbk1234]

In not saying I agree with signing Levert over Sexton longterm, I just recognize thats whats going to happen. The Cavs dont trade for players that they dont sign longterm (ex: Lauri/Allen) and reports are out there already that the Cavs view him as a longterm piece they want to lock up. So knowing that LeVert is highly likely to be signed lonterm, that leaves Sexton/Cedi/Rubio and others with less money to be taken care of. Cant have em all (I dont think at least)

Either way, that has no relation to the fact that I think Rubio is more important to success of the Cavs than Sexton is lol

Would you be more comfortable giving 3/45 to Rubio or 4/110 to Sexton? Knowing you have LeVert?

I personally would give 3/45 to Rubio first regardless of the LeVert situation. I truely think he is a 'raises all ships' type of player and finding a similar enough player with Sextons skillet is far easier for MUCH cheaper than what he is asking for through the draft/FA.

EX: You could sign somebody like.....Malcom Brogdon for 4/65 who does Collin Sexton better than Collin Sexton does Collin Sexton.

The idea that the Cavs will extend LeVert this summer, no matter what, regardless of how well he plays or fits on this roster, suggests a level of incompetence that I just don't believe the Cavs F.O. is handicapped by. If the results are good, he'll get extended. If the results are bad, he won't. If the results are mixed, they'll have a decision to make.

You have been adamant about this. The Caris Levert hate strongggg

I could care less either way, they are going to retain talent one way or another--im just reading the writing on the wall.

Lauri Markenen constantly hampered by injures too in Chicago and had major questions with his defense (among other things)? The Cavs still locked him up before he even played a game with us lol

I remember you loving the LM trade (i think that was you), whats so different about LeVerts situation?

I did not love the Lauri trade. Even know I'm just okay with it. But the obvious difference between the two situations is that the Cavs had no choice but to offer Lauri at least three years as he was a RFA and he had to agree to the numbers. LeVert is going to be under contract for the remainder of this season and the next regardless of whether the Cavs offer him an extension this summer. I'll be happy to be proven wrong about how well LeVert works out on this roster, and if I am, he'll get an extension this summer.

[JonFromVA]

We're going to be over the salary cap next season and we gave up our Bird rights on Ricky, so, the most we can offer Ricky would be an MLE contract and that may turn out to be the tax payer MLE because of our cap holds.

So, re-calibrate your thinking around Ricky getting something like 3/19, and we can't sign Brogdon (not a free agent and will make too much), but we could trade for him.

If Rubio signs for three years on the NTMLE, he's crazy. He won't know how long it will take to come all the way back from his knee, but by the 2023 offseason he should be nearing full health and wanting at least a full MLE paycheck.

Much more likely to take a 1-year deal on the TP MLE, or a 2-year deal with a PO on the second year, so he can get a raise when he's fully back from the ACL tear. Lots of teams have cap room in 2023 so he'll have options. Also makes sense from the Cavs' perspective to mitigate long-term risk that he never comes back fully from injury. The Cavs can retain Goodwin in the Pangos "third PG" role, even though he'll probably get minutes throughout the year (depending on LeVert and Sexton).

I just can't imagine another team being willing to guarantee Ricky money for maybe 1/2 a season before getting a chance to even see how much he's recovered. Ricky may not care about that, he's earned $100M in his NBA career; but it does have value and I'd expect it to be reflected in the deal.