Trade Ideas (Part III)

[jbk1234]

Not sure where this rumor came from or the legitimacy of it.... Clarkson + 5 for Lavine + 7

https://kingjamesgospel.com/2019/06/16/cleveland-cavaliers-weighing-pros-cons-trading-for-zach-lavine/

What are your guys' thoughts on it? He's under contract for 3 more years, at around $20m per season. Definitely would give a big boost to our team.... I'm just not sure Chicago does it.

I think we'd have to trade Sexton after this. You couldn't start those two in the same backcourt.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-J327A using RealGM mobile app

[MorleyGrape1]

Not sure where this rumor came from or the legitimacy of it.... Clarkson + 5 for Lavine + 7

https://kingjamesgospel.com/2019/06/16/cleveland-cavaliers-weighing-pros-cons-trading-for-zach-lavine/

What are your guys' thoughts on it? He's under contract for 3 more years, at around $20m per season. Definitely would give a big boost to our team.... I'm just not sure Chicago does it.

I saw that, that's a value win for the cavs no doubt and I don't think Chicago would do it...but Lavine is pretty bad defensively from what I have seen.

[substancej]

Not sure where this rumor came from or the legitimacy of it.... Clarkson + 5 for Lavine + 7

https://kingjamesgospel.com/2019/06/16/cleveland-cavaliers-weighing-pros-cons-trading-for-zach-lavine/

What are your guys' thoughts on it? He's under contract for 3 more years, at around $20m per season. Definitely would give a big boost to our team.... I'm just not sure Chicago does it.

I saw that, that's a value win for the cavs no doubt and I don't think Chicago would do it...but Lavine is pretty bad defensively from what I have seen.

Can't be worse than Sexton defensively. Not even a knock on his game. I like Sexton.

[jbk1234]

Not sure where this rumor came from or the legitimacy of it.... Clarkson + 5 for Lavine + 7

https://kingjamesgospel.com/2019/06/16/cleveland-cavaliers-weighing-pros-cons-trading-for-zach-lavine/

What are your guys' thoughts on it? He's under contract for 3 more years, at around $20m per season. Definitely would give a big boost to our team.... I'm just not sure Chicago does it.

I saw that, that's a value win for the cavs no doubt and I don't think Chicago would do it...but Lavine is pretty bad defensively from what I have seen.

Can't be worse than Sexton defensively. Not even a knock on his game. I like Sexton.

Both Sexton and LaVine play exactly zero defense. You couldn't start them together. One of them would have to come off the bench. I'd say it would be trading yourself into a Kyrie/Dion situation except that Dion could at least play passable on-the-ball defense. Words fail me when it comes to expressing just how bad a Sexton/LaVine back court would be defensively.

[Stillwater]

Cavs are not trading for Lavine

[ToneLocc]

Read on Twitter

Take this FWIW....

[Stillwater]

Read on Twitter

Take this FWIW....

this is bogus imo coming from ATL
Cavs unlikely to accept 10 and 17 just for 5 without Love included and a lot more coming back if he was

[Revenged25]

Read on Twitter

Take this FWIW....

this is bogus imo coming from ATL
Cavs unlikely to accept 10 and 17 just for 5 without Love included and a lot more coming back if he was

There's no reason for this trade unless Atlanta was going to be trading away John Collins to Cleveland as well, but that's not likely.

[ToneLocc]

Read on Twitter

[Revenged25]

Read on Twitter

So basically they want a trade where they get good/positive value for him and most teams don't want to offer that.

[jbk1234]

Read on Twitter

I listened to the interview. That quote is inaccurate. Windy did not say that *the Cavs put Love into trade talks.*

Read on Twitter

[Revenged25]

If CP3 is traded from Houston, I could see a 3 team trade with CP3 going to one team, Houston wanting Love to pair with Harden/Capela, and then Cavs getting assets for the 3rd team. Probably the only version of a Love trade where Cleveland gets appropriate value.

[Stillwater]

Nobody is trading for CP3 his contract is 10x worse than Loves

[jbk1234]

I would not take the L on a Love trade. Love and Nance, possibly TT, are the only guys on the roster who would start for another NBA team. I also don't buy the argument that we should trade Love so we can be really bad. The Wizards won 32 games and ended up picking No. 9 even with the Lakers jumping ahead of them. The Cavs won 19 games. Even if the Cavs add an additional 10 wins by playing Love they'll keep their pick and with the new lottery odds they could end up moving up.

The product on the floor has to resemble NBA basketball or your prospects aren't going to develop the right way. The first year LBJ came back he came very close to leaving after one season because neither Kyrie nor Waiters knew how to play the right way. If it wasn't for those midseason trades, we could have missed out on the title run completely.

[DusterBuster]

I would not take the L on a Love trade. Love and Nance, possibly TT, are the only guys on the roster who would start for another NBA team. I also don't buy the argument that we should trade Love so we can be really bad. The Wizards won 32 games and ended up picking No. 9 even with the Lakers jumping ahead of them. The Cavs won 19 games. Even if the Cavs add an additional 10 wins by playing Love they'll keep their pick and with the new lottery odds they could end up moving up.

The product on the floor has to resemble NBA basketball or your prospects aren't going to develop the right way. The first year LBJ came back he came very close to leaving after one season because neither Kyrie nor Waiters knew how to play the right way. If it wasn't for those midseason trades, we could have missed out on the title run completely.

Serious question, not trying to convince you of another viewpoint or anything, just genuinely curious... So I get your viewpoint of not wanting to sell low on Love, but my question is, do you realistically and unbiasedly as possible expect his value to improve anytime soon?

[Richfield]

So I get your viewpoint of not wanting to sell low on Love, but my question is, do you realistically and unbiasedly as possible expect his value to improve anytime soon?

Can I ask clarification on your question to jbk1234? Seems like the premise of your question implies his value is currently low. Isn't that where the fundamental disagreement lies? Why would it improve if its already where it should be, high?

Teams may be expecting young Altman to sell low, and then maybe offer more as draft night or free agency approach, so in that sense it always improves around these dates. But you're asking the question as though his value is currently low. It's not. That's already the disagreement, so improving is relative to where it starts, which isn't agreed upon. As soon as teams realize Altman won't budge on "low" (assuming he doesn't), that is when his value "improves". But his actual value is already high where it should be, assuming Altman knows what he's doing.

[DusterBuster]

So I get your viewpoint of not wanting to sell low on Love, but my question is, do you realistically and unbiasedly as possible expect his value to improve anytime soon?

Can I ask clarification on your question to jbk1234? Seems like the premise of your question implies his value is currently low. Isn't that where the fundamental disagreement lies? Why would it improve if its already where it should be, high?

Teams may be expecting young Altman to sell low, and then maybe offer more as draft night or free agency approach, so in that sense it always improves around these dates. But you're asking the question as though his value is currently low. It's not. That's already the disagreement, so improving is relative to where it starts, which isn't agreed upon. As soon as teams realize Altman won't budge on "low" (assuming he doesn't), that is when his value "improves". But his actual value is already high where it should be, assuming Altman knows what he's doing.

But... it clearly is. If the team has been at least listening to offers around the league involving Love and have been unimpressed, that means the players value is low. I don't know how anyone - unbiasedly looking at it - can assume that a player in his early 30's who's missed over 100 games in the past 3 seasons and is owed 28-30mil per year for the next 4 years has anything but low trade value across the league.

[Richfield]

Its probably because we watched the Cavs last year and you didn't. Its their job to listen to offers, not to sell low.

If his value was low, Blazers, Jazz, Thunder, and other teams' fans wouldn't be in here asking about him, and claiming how low his value is. They'd have their attention elsewhere.

[jbk1234]

I would not take the L on a Love trade. Love and Nance, possibly TT, are the only guys on the roster who would start for another NBA team. I also don't buy the argument that we should trade Love so we can be really bad. The Wizards won 32 games and ended up picking No. 9 even with the Lakers jumping ahead of them. The Cavs won 19 games. Even if the Cavs add an additional 10 wins by playing Love they'll keep their pick and with the new lottery odds they could end up moving up.

The product on the floor has to resemble NBA basketball or your prospects aren't going to develop the right way. The first year LBJ came back he came very close to leaving after one season because neither Kyrie nor Waiters knew how to play the right way. If it wasn't for those midseason trades, we could have missed out on the title run completely.

Serious question, not trying to convince you of another viewpoint or anything, just genuinely curious... So I get your viewpoint of not wanting to sell low on Love, but my question is, do you realistically and unbiasedly as possible expect his value to improve anytime soon?

I do, but that's not really my point.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-J327A using RealGM mobile app

[jbk1234]

Read on Twitter

?s=20

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-J327A using RealGM mobile app