Cavs / Hawks / Wizards

JJ_PR · Post #1 » by **JJ_PR** » Tue Oct 15, 2024 8:34 am

Cavs get: De'Andre Hunter and Marvin Bagley III
Hawks get: Max Strus and Georges Niang
Wizards get: Dean Wade

Why?
Cavs get a wing and a third big.
Hawks add a shooter and a coach favorite.
Wizards upgrade their big man rotation and save some cash.

tbhawksfan1 · Post #2 » by **tbhawksfan1** » Tue Oct 15, 2024 10:52 am

Not a fan of the value for the Hawks. If the Hawks try to move Hunter, I think they will look for a very different kind of trade. An expiring and prot FRP seems much more realistic

Stus and Niang would likely be third sting on the Hawks

Post #3 » by **Mavrelous** » Tue Oct 15, 2024 10:55 am

Max Strus >> DeAndre Hunter the player, he's worse than the idea od Hunter, but not the player in reality.

Post #4 » by **jbk1234** » Tue Oct 15, 2024 11:02 am

What are you doing my man? Bagley sucks and you're trading our best bench big for him. I don't think I'd trade Niang for Bagley. Also, Strus is more reliable than Hunter from a health standpointt, they have similar on the court value, and Hunter is paid more.

toooskies · Post #5 » by **toooskies** » Tue Oct 15, 2024 2:14 pm

I would rather have Dean Wade OR Max Strus than Hunter+Bagley. Specifically I am not interested in Hunter, he's big-wing-shaped but I don't think he's an improvement offensively or defensively over Strus. And, his contract is prohibitive.

Bagley might be slowly figuring out how to be a positive on the court (the on-off numbers aren't as bad as I thought they'd be) but I'm not particularly interested as long as the Cavs have Mobley + Allen. Any big the Cavs trade for needs to be able to shoot better than Bagley.

hugepatsfan · Post #6 » by **hugepatsfan** » Tue Oct 15, 2024 3:14 pm

CLE gives: Strus, Niang
CLE gets: Hunter

Why? Add a bigger wing, save $2M to get below the tax.

ATL gives: Hunter
ATL gets: Strus, Jevon Carter

Why? Sabe some money this year and in the future. Strus is as good a player as Hunter and they have more forwards they can play so they're ok with the smaller player.

LAC gives: Tucker
LAC gets: Niang

Why? Take on a 2nd contract year to save $2M this year which puts them some back of the roster gymnastics from getting below the tax this year before gearing up to be spenders again next year.

CHI gives: Jevon Carter
CHI gets: Tucker

Why? Swap out some surplus guard depth for a PF which is a roster weak spot for them. They also shed a contract year.

giberish · Post #7 » by **giberish** » Tue Oct 15, 2024 4:17 pm

I'm surprised a Cavs fan proposed this. Isn't Wade as good as Hunter? And expecting Bagley to be a rotation player on a non-tank team feels wildly optimistic.

wemby · Post #8 » by **wemby** » Tue Oct 15, 2024 4:24 pm

You a Cavs fan??? :eek1:

toooskies · Post #9 » by **toooskies** » Tue Oct 15, 2024 5:17 pm

giberish wrote:I'm surprised a Cavs fan proposed this. Isn't Wade as good as Hunter? And expecting Bagley to be a rotation player on a non-tank team feels wildly optimistic.

If you need a bucket, Hunter would be better at getting it.

Wade is probably better at most everything else on a basketball court, particularly defense, screening, and rebounding.

You could say the same with Strus, except all the categories are probably closer than with Wade and that Strus is a better passer than all of them.

For a 5th starter the Cavs' current players make more sense.

tsarcast · Post #10 » by **tsarcast** » Tue Oct 15, 2024 6:35 pm

Cavs are sending out the best 3 players in the deal....

brackdan70 · Post #11 » by **brackdan70** » Tue Oct 15, 2024 8:28 pm

I can’t see why for Cleveland.
They trade the two best players in the deal for the two worst.

They at least need some compensation, but I really don’t think they would have interest. Bagley can’t be trusted in games that matter.

ecuhus1981 · Post #12 » by **ecuhus1981** » Tue Oct 15, 2024 9:05 pm

This proposal is DoA, Cavs don't need anything from either team, especially at the expense of Strus and Wade, 2 of the most efficient role players in the league.

axeman23 · Post #13 » by **axeman23** » Wed Oct 16, 2024 7:16 am

wemby wrote:You a Cavs fan???

I swear, maybe 1 in 10 of the OP's proposals actually have positive value coming back to the Cavs, compared to what's outgoing, and it's often not debatable. MAYBE the OP just doesn't want to be labelled as a person that always rips off the OTHER team in value, i guess. But you can do that without hurting your OWN value... :lol:

I mean, the ATL leg has an argument, sure. But the Wade/Bagley swap is DOA.

axeman23 · Post #14 » by **axeman23** » Wed Oct 16, 2024 7:20 am

brackdan70 wrote:I can’t see why for Cleveland.
They trade the two best players in the deal for the two worst.

They at least need some compensation, but I really don’t think they would have interest. Bagley can’t be trusted in games that matter.

I'd definitely keep Wade and Strus over what's on offer here, but you WOULDN'T have to twist my arm very far to move Niang, I'll tell you that now! :lol:

brackdan70 · Post #15 » by **brackdan70** » Wed Oct 16, 2024 11:57 am

axeman23 wrote:
brackdan70 wrote:I can’t see why for Cleveland.
They trade the two best players in the deal for the two worst.

They at least need some compensation, but I really don’t think they would have interest. Bagley can’t be trusted in games that matter.

I'd definitely keep Wade and Strus over what's on offer here, but you WOULDN'T have to twist my arm very far to move Niang, I'll tell you that now!

Precisely why I said best 2 players.

toooskies · Post #16 » by **toooskies** » Wed Oct 16, 2024 2:17 pm

ecuhus1981 wrote:This proposal is DoA, Cavs don't need anything from either team, especially at the expense of Strus and Wade, 2 of the most efficient role players in the league.

I sort of disagree here. Strus and Wade certainly aren't efficient offensively and there are guys I wouldn't hate getting back from those teams (Kispert, Nance, Kuzma, Brogdon). Bagley isn't on the list though, and Hunter isn't worth his salary.

Post #17 » by **jbk1234** » Wed Oct 16, 2024 2:53 pm

toooskies wrote:
ecuhus1981 wrote:This proposal is DoA, Cavs don't need anything from either team, especially at the expense of Strus and Wade, 2 of the most efficient role players in the league.

I sort of disagree here. Strus and Wade certainly aren't efficient offensively and there are guys I wouldn't hate getting back from those teams (Kispert, Nance, Kuzma, Brogdon). Bagley isn't on the list though, and Hunter isn't worth his salary.

Stus has a career TS % of .573 which is more than efficient enough for a guy who shoots that much and is a solid defender. Wade has a career TS% of .580, and while he doesn't shoot as often as Strus, he still defends and rebounds well. Once you factor in their respective contracts, and the fact that the Cavs will be in the tax for the foreseeable future, I'll be shocked if either guy is traded.

toooskies · Post #18 » by **toooskies** » Wed Oct 16, 2024 5:42 pm

jbk1234 wrote:
toooskies wrote:
ecuhus1981 wrote:This proposal is DoA, Cavs don't need anything from either team, especially at the expense of Strus and Wade, 2 of the most efficient role players in the league.

I sort of disagree here. Strus and Wade certainly aren't efficient offensively and there are guys I wouldn't hate getting back from those teams (Kispert, Nance, Kuzma, Brogdon). Bagley isn't on the list though, and Hunter isn't worth his salary.

Stus has a career TS % of .573 which is more than efficient enough for a guy who shoots that much and is a solid defender. Wade has a career TS% of .580, and while he doesn't shoot as often as Strus, he still defends and rebounds well. Once you factor in their respective contracts, and the fact that the Cavs will be in the tax for the foreseeable future, I'll be shocked if either guy is traded.

Yeah, I mean they're not going to be moved. As I said up-thread, I rate them better than the other guys in the OP's trade individually. They're also the best fits for their roles on the current Cavs roster.

But Strus's career efficiency is leaning on some hyper-efficient early career numbers while being below league average the past two years. Wade has been efficient (but only around average TS% for his position) but at super-low volume. They are not the most efficient role players in the league as the post I was replying to stated.

axeman23 · Post #19 » by **axeman23** » Thu Oct 17, 2024 2:03 am

brackdan70 wrote:
axeman23 wrote:
brackdan70 wrote:I can’t see why for Cleveland.
They trade the two best players in the deal for the two worst.

They at least need some compensation, but I really don’t think they would have interest. Bagley can’t be trusted in games that matter.

I'd definitely keep Wade and Strus over what's on offer here, but you WOULDN'T have to twist my arm very far to move Niang, I'll tell you that now!

Precisely why I said best 2 players.

Sorry, mate. I think I combined your post with the 1 above yours maybe? That 1 said "3 best"... But yeah, I think we're in agreement. :thumbsup:

axeman23 · Post #20 » by **axeman23** » Thu Oct 17, 2024 2:12 am

toooskies wrote:
ecuhus1981 wrote:This proposal is DoA, Cavs don't need anything from either team, especially at the expense of Strus and Wade, 2 of the most efficient role players in the league.

I sort of disagree here. Strus and Wade certainly aren't efficient offensively and there are guys I wouldn't hate getting back from those teams (Kispert, Nance, Kuzma, Brogdon). Bagley isn't on the list though, and Hunter isn't worth his salary.

The only one of those you mentioned I'd even LISTEN to would be Brogdon, and I don't think I'd move Strus or Wade for him. The rest frankly don't interest me. Kispert did, in the DRAFT as a complete variable, and we mostly have a soft spot for Nance Jr, but not enough to believe he'd actually be much HELP moving forward. Kuzma, I just find unlikeable, from a playing standpoint, a personality standpoint, AND fit, both team and city-wise.