RealGM

Okay so I'm glad I didn't do this post earlier because there's a whole lot of new information that came out between when the trade was announced and completed.

Grade: C

The good: Crowder, Zizic, and the Nets pick. This was probably the best offer in a vacuum. Crowder is now the second most important piece in this deal (even though I think he's a little overrated defensively). He give us a lot more rotation flexibility and can provide LBJ some much needed regular season rest. Zizic isn't going to contribute much this year so I hope the Cavs view him as a potential trade asset as it's becoming increasingly clear that Gilbert intends on retaining that Nets pick.

Kyrie had to go. Cavs were getting lowballed, and again, this was probably the best offer they would get in a vacuum. There are now reports that LBJ's camp still held out hope that the two of them could've gotten into a room and worked it out. If LBJ's camp really felt that way, then they should've gotten on the phone and gotten in a room with him. If they tried and couldn't, then that was false hope. I suspect it was false hope anyway as I've seen Kyrie's Eddie-Haskell routine too many times. They could've squashed it before the season started and Kyrie would've been bucking/moping by December. It would've taken LBJ consistently deferring to Kyrie on the court and that would not have led to better results on the court.

I expect ball movement to be considerably better and the regular season to be a bit easier this year. The Cavs regular-season record belied how good they actually were the past three seasons.

The bad: Defense. We tried to outscore the Warriors last year and needed every member of the big 3 to get really hot in the same game - just to win just one game. Think about that. You've got to do a better job of slowing them down. It was almost impossible to trade Kyrie and get a worse defender at PG. Yet, we did it! Whatever defensive improvement we get from Crowder, and he's got no shot at guarding KD (that's a fantasy), it will be eclipsed by the fact that IT can't guard anyone on the starting unit or death line up. This leads me to my next point...

Roster construction: The Cavs are a luxury tax team with more guaranteed contracts than roster spots. They have to move some redundant players or cut guys while paying the luxury tax on their contracts. They're in a position where they've got to salary dump players and people know it. We're going to have to pay to dump expiring contracts and league minimum deals. So subtract the cost of that out of the Kyrie trade and hope the cost is not too high.

None of their off-season signings makes sense in light of this trade. We now have four PGs on the roster and not one of them can play a lick of defense. It is practically impossible to put together an NBA roster where Derrick Rose is your best defensive PG. We can't trade guys we signed this summer, or recently traded for, before the season starts. That means we're going to have to trade players who were on the roster before this summer. I'd much rather take a Mulligan on Calderon & J. Green. Gilbert wants to dump more salary, Shump is constantly being rumored to be on the block, and he's the last remaining member of the Cavs who can guard players like Kyrie or Curry in the post season.

Due to our roster construction, IT's health, and his contract status, I put IT's inclusion in the trade as neutral at best. Assuming IT makes it back by January, and can play at 90% of his prior level, there's going to be roster integration problems. If the Cavs are successful with whatever starting line up they have while IT's out, then there's going to be a debate as to whether he should start. His RPM numbers on the Cavs as a starter could be Kyrieesque.

The debate about IT's inclusion in the starting line up in the playoffs, and especially in the Finals, will only intensify. In a contract year, IT's not going to like that. You know who else wouldn't like the option of sending IT to the bench - D. Rose. Rose shouldn't start either. There's a good argument that we now have two guys who play the same position and who would be really good options off the bench, but who wouldn't be positives as starters on our roster.

Due to his health status, IT's has almost no trade value. If he was ready by the season opener, the Cavs were better with him off the bench, and he didn't like it, we could've shopped him for another quality PG. To put it mildly, that's unlikely to be an option now.

This is all the best case scenario with regard to IT's health status. Worst-case scenario is that he eventually needs surgery and he's just an expensive cap hit and waste of a roster spot.

Making the Brooklyn pick the best asset in the Kyrie deal. The number of things that need to go right for the Cavs to win this trade now exceeds my risk threshold. (1) The Nets have to be really bad in a weakened Eastern Conference. (2) You can't be unlucky in the lottery (the year the Cavs took TT with their pick they had the second worst record in the league but other teams jumped them). (3) These high school kids need to meet expectations at the college level (see Harrison Barnes & Skal Labissiere). (4) These high school kids need to stay healthy (see the Sixers). (5) These kids then need to meet expectations at the NBA level. These are long odds which is why so many teams never get out of a rebuild despite having multiple high picks.

Assuming Gilbert changes his mind and puts it on the table in trade talks, there aren't many players who are worth it and might be available. (Side note: enjoy teams asking for it any trade discussion including a bunch where it will be ridiculous). Cousins and PG are expiring. You're going to have to send out TT or JR with the pick to get either of them. Both OKC & N.O. would ask for Love & the pick which would be an egregious overpay for a player who is only under contract for a few more months. You could end up trading that pick, and a good player under contract for years, only to watch LBJ & that star walk this summer. Which leads me to my last point...

This trade really highlighted the growing rift between LBJ & Gilbert. It's out now that LBJ didn't want this trade to go through. Most of Woj's sources are agents. That story about the Cavs wanting Brown or Tatum after the physical almost certainly came from LBJ's camp. You can't have a shadow F.O. and an actual F.O. with conflicting agendas but that's where we're at. In sensitive situations involving franchise changing trades, the results can be disastrous. It makes us look dysfunctional, impacts how incoming players view the organization, and raises trust issues with opposing GMs.

The time for LBJ to have his cake and eat it too has passed. If he doesn't want to commit to an extension that's fine, but he's got no right to insist on Gilbert trading that pick now or even making a particular deal. He's got a decision to make if the right opportunity presents itself again. The Cavs are already worse off because they wouldn't pull the trigger on the Kyrie for Bledsoe/PG deal and they didn't do that deal because LBJ wouldn't commit to an extension.

The alternative offers: If there's truth to the Bucks offer of Middleton, Bragdon, and a 1st, the Cavs should've taken it. In a vacuum, it didn't have as much value as the Celtics offer. But for the reasons I've outlined, trades don't occur in a vacuum. IT's health status significantly altered the value of this trade for the Cavs. Cavs should've voided the trade IMO.

I'm happy to be wrong, I hope I'm wrong, but this is honestly how I see it.

if the cavs really wanted to make an all in move to use lebron for one last run and have no plan to flip the bkn 1st for another FA, then i agree the bucks trade should have been the one to take

that being said, i really do hope IT comes back and lights it up in the playoffs. could be a real x factor if he really gels with lebron and the current lineup. it helps a lot that he's playing w/ crowder imo who i also anticipate to be a starter; their chemistry should make the transition for him easier.

karkinos wrote:if the cavs really wanted to make an all in move to use lebron for one last run and have no plan to flip the bkn 1st for another FA, then i agree the bucks trade should have been the one to take

that being said, i really do hope IT comes back and lights it up in the playoffs. could be a real x factor if he really gels with lebron and the current lineup. it helps a lot that he's playing w/ crowder imo who i also anticipate to be a starter; their chemistry should make the transition for him easier.

The Cavs will see at least two of the following three players this post season: Wall, Kyrie, & Curry. They may see all three. It's a problem with IT starting.

it is, but IT is the kind of guy who benefits from being ball dominant. i know everyone is pretty down on rose, but if he can be average, allowing IT to run the 2nd unit for scoring might be the strength for the cavs here that adds depth.

karkinos wrote:it is, but IT is the kind of guy who benefits from being ball dominant. i know everyone is pretty down on rose, but if he can be average, allowing IT to run the 2nd unit for scoring might be the strength for the cavs here that adds depth.

Try to imagine the reaction, from a player who averaged 29 ppg and was 5th in MVP voting last year, being told he's coming off the bench in a contract year (when he's never had a big contract).

It is what it is; IT knows it, and he'll grind through it. he's mentally strong enough to understand that regardless if he's a starter or a bench player, if he wants that brinks truck he's gonna have to go out and play for it whether he gets 10 minutes or 40. i really wouldn't worry about IT acting like a punk. too much is on the line. if anything it should be motivation to take derrick rose's spot.

how soon can IT4 be traded?

Stillwater wrote:how soon can IT4 be traded?

As a practical matter, probably not before he's healthy enough to get on the court and rehab his trade value.

karkinos wrote:It is what it is; IT knows it, and he'll grind through it. he's mentally strong enough to understand that regardless if he's a starter or a bench player, if he wants that brinks truck he's gonna have to go out and play for it whether he gets 10 minutes or 40. i really wouldn't worry about IT acting like a punk. too much is on the line. if anything it should be motivation to take derrick rose's spot.

While I think this was actually a very good trade for the Cavs -- there's downside insurance if LeBron leaves and if indications are he will stay, the team could become significantly better by trading the Brooklyn pick. It's the best scenario for a star that wanted out.

Having said that, how the team treats IT definitely does matter. While I agree that he likely won't be a malcontent, this is his entire livelihood and future we're talking about. His next contract means a lot for him, and not being viewed as treating him 'right' has both implications for team chemistry and team reputation.

jbk1234 wrote:

Stillwater wrote:how soon can IT4 be traded?

As a practical matter, probably not before he's healthy enough to get on the court and rehab his trade value.

yep, well if he is healthy enough to play before the trade deadline we probably won't move him anyway , I was just wondering if anyone knew what date we had to wait to or if we could flip him right now(even though we wouldn't get much for him given all of the chatter over the past week) but at the same time you gotta wonder if any org out there is more willing to take that risk than we are to unload somebody that we can at least rely on to be on the court.

DubTheVanDamage wrote:

karkinos wrote:It is what it is; IT knows it, and he'll grind through it. he's mentally strong enough to understand that regardless if he's a starter or a bench player, if he wants that brinks truck he's gonna have to go out and play for it whether he gets 10 minutes or 40. i really wouldn't worry about IT acting like a punk. too much is on the line. if anything it should be motivation to take derrick rose's spot.

While I think this was actually a very good trade for the Cavs -- there's downside insurance if LeBron leaves and if indications are he will stay, the team could become significantly better by trading the Brooklyn pick. It's the best scenario for a star that wanted out.

Having said that, how the team treats IT definitely does matter. While I agree that he likely won't be a malcontent, this is his entire livelihood and future we're talking about. His next contract means a lot for him, and not being viewed as treating him 'right' has both implications for team chemistry and team reputation.

Which, in my mind, is the big problem with trading for him after the severity of his injury became known. The national media lives to crap all over Gilbert anyway. The Cavs should be free to make the best decisions for their team, even if it means not starting IT, without all the garbage that will follow. The Cavs could've traded a healthy IT, if he was unhappy with his role, and gotten at least replacement level two-way PG. Now they're going to have live with whatever narrative develops if he doesn't start.

Stillwater wrote:

jbk1234 wrote:

Stillwater wrote:how soon can IT4 be traded?

As a practical matter, probably not before he's healthy enough to get on the court and rehab his trade value.

yep, well if he is healthy enough to play before the trade deadline we probably won't move him anyway , I was just wondering if anyone knew what date we had to wait to or if we could flip him right now(even though we wouldn't get much for him given all of the chatter over the past week) but at the same time you gotta wonder if any org out there is more willing to take that risk than we are to unload somebody that we can at least rely on to be on the court.

A team like Bulls would take him for sure. Rehab him. If he plays well, ship him for an asset to a playoff team before the deadline.

jbk1234 wrote:

Stillwater wrote:

jbk1234 wrote:
As a practical matter, probably not before he's healthy enough to get on the court and rehab his trade value.

yep, well if he is healthy enough to play before the trade deadline we probably won't move him anyway , I was just wondering if anyone knew what date we had to wait to or if we could flip him right now(even though we wouldn't get much for him given all of the chatter over the past week) but at the same time you gotta wonder if any org out there is more willing to take that risk than we are to unload somebody that we can at least rely on to be on the court.

A team like Bulls would take him for sure. Rehab him. If he plays well, ship him for an asset to a playoff team before the deadline.

yeah I mean, so could we obviously, but I have serious doubts he can avoid re-aggravating the injury this season even if he starts playing for us anytime in the next 90 days. I would rather get rid of him now than later even if I am wrong based on what I have read about his case and the general info on these Impingements.
The information I found last week on FAI says At times, an MRI for example will be read as “Normal” but the clinical history, physical exam, and plain x-ray films could indicate FAI .
This is what lead me to think Boston was simply not sharing everything,because they were probably only required to share the physical results not all results from when he had them, hence the situation we have here where Boston gets away with giving us an asset that really isn't one even though we agreed to it knowing that after our tests were done over valuing the other aspects of the deal.
In this situation, where there are differing exam results further investigation is only possible with arthroscopic surgery.
Maybe after further rehab setbacks (which seems to be what has been the trend up until this time) he ends up realizing he needs surgery, then we are sol.
Typically, FAI that produces symptoms does not "heal itself" according to what I have read , & delay in FAI treatment may compromise the cartilage of the hip regardless of him painting the picture that he will be back and will return to his former self. Which he could until it's re-aggravated ,but not likely without having the arthroscopic surgery at minimum and the longer he waits the higher his risk of not coming out of the surgery and returning to form either, and ruin his career.
I think he needs to start thinking about the rest of his life instead of the rest of his contract year.& as much as I feel for the guy, I would rather he did it on someone else's watch than ours.

jbk1234 wrote:

karkinos wrote:if the cavs really wanted to make an all in move to use lebron for one last run and have no plan to flip the bkn 1st for another FA, then i agree the bucks trade should have been the one to take

that being said, i really do hope IT comes back and lights it up in the playoffs. could be a real x factor if he really gels with lebron and the current lineup. it helps a lot that he's playing w/ crowder imo who i also anticipate to be a starter; their chemistry should make the transition for him easier.

The Cavs will see at least two of the following three players this post season: Wall, Kyrie, & Curry. They may see all three. It's a problem with IT starting.

Nobody really stops those guys very effectively though. And you can't ignore IT's offensive impact either. No one can really guard him very well either, so it's kind of a wash.

On a team with LeBron, a guy like IT isn't as necessary, but neither is a guy like Kyrie. Spot up shooting is tough for a guy like IT with his size, but obviously he figures it out.

It will be interesting to see how he plays though. I wasn't a big fan of him in Phx, but obviously Stevens got the most out of him one way or another so it will be interesting to see how he works out in Cleveland.

Also, especially while IT is out, do they really need to start a PG? Would they not be better just to put shooters at both guard spots? Also, Calderon might work well as a shooter/ball handler if he can get his shooting stroke back. Prior to last year he shot over 40% from 3 for 4 years straight. If he can get back to form, he might be the best guy to start if you want to start a traditional PG.

jbk1234 wrote:

karkinos wrote:if the cavs really wanted to make an all in move to use lebron for one last run and have no plan to flip the bkn 1st for another FA, then i agree the bucks trade should have been the one to take

that being said, i really do hope IT comes back and lights it up in the playoffs. could be a real x factor if he really gels with lebron and the current lineup. it helps a lot that he's playing w/ crowder imo who i also anticipate to be a starter; their chemistry should make the transition for him easier.

The Cavs will see at least two of the following three players this post season: Wall, Kyrie, & Curry. They may see all three. It's a problem with IT starting.

IT beat Wall in the Playoffs, was hurt when he played Kyrie and beat Curry at home in the regular season two years in a row. And he did all of that without another All-star playing with him. You really shouldn't be so down on him, he was amazing on the Cs and he will be for you as well. Remember, he is in a contract year.

CeltsfaninDC wrote:

jbk1234 wrote:

karkinos wrote:if the cavs really wanted to make an all in move to use lebron for one last run and have no plan to flip the bkn 1st for another FA, then i agree the bucks trade should have been the one to take

that being said, i really do hope IT comes back and lights it up in the playoffs. could be a real x factor if he really gels with lebron and the current lineup. it helps a lot that he's playing w/ crowder imo who i also anticipate to be a starter; their chemistry should make the transition for him easier.

The Cavs will see at least two of the following three players this post season: Wall, Kyrie, & Curry. They may see all three. It's a problem with IT starting.

IT beat Wall in the Playoffs, was hurt when he played Kyrie and beat Curry at home in the regular season two years in a row. And he did all of that without another All-star playing with him. You really shouldn't be so down on him, he was amazing on the Cs and he will be for you as well. Remember, he is in a contract year.

All I can say is I hope I'm 100% wrong. But I don't believe I am.

I think this trade was an A for the Cavs, provided IT is healthy. If IT misses training camp and doesn't play until the regular season starts, the Cavs could run into trouble during the season with trying to integrate IT into the system. This could lead to some early season losses and force the Cavs to make up those L's during periods where they could have been resting.

With Kyrie, I think it's important to note that he hasn't proven anything yet. Lebron makes players better. Kyrie will have every opportunity to show he's an elite talent without Lebron in Boston and it's going to be interesting to see if he can prove it.

HeatFanLifer wrote:I think this trade was an A for the Cavs, provided IT is healthy. If IT misses training camp and doesn't play until the regular season starts, the Cavs could run into trouble during the season with trying to integrate IT into the system. This could lead to some early season losses and force the Cavs to make up those L's during periods where they could have been resting.

With Kyrie, I think it's important to note that he hasn't proven anything yet. Lebron makes players better. Kyrie will have every opportunity to show he's an elite talent without Lebron in Boston and it's going to be interesting to see if he can prove it.

I just think you've got a hard ceiling with IT as a starter in the post season.

jbk1234 wrote:

HeatFanLifer wrote:I think this trade was an A for the Cavs, provided IT is healthy. If IT misses training camp and doesn't play until the regular season starts, the Cavs could run into trouble during the season with trying to integrate IT into the system. This could lead to some early season losses and force the Cavs to make up those L's during periods where they could have been resting.

With Kyrie, I think it's important to note that he hasn't proven anything yet. Lebron makes players better. Kyrie will have every opportunity to show he's an elite talent without Lebron in Boston and it's going to be interesting to see if he can prove it.

I just think you've got a hard ceiling with IT as a starter in the post season.

No dispute with that. However, I give the trade an A because I don't think there could have been a better trade. Sometimes the alternatives to get out of a situation are bad and worse.

http://www.csnne.com/boston-celtics/report-isaiah-thomas-could-be-out-until-all-star-break
now it comes out , of course.No surprise for me.