Cleveland goes for broke with Sacramento

Moderators: Andre Roberstan, HartfordWhalers, BullyKing, Texas Chuck, MoneyTalks41890, Mamba4Goat, pacers33granger, Trader_Joe, loserX

User avatar
heathmalc
Analyst
Posts: 3,083
And1: 16
Joined: Jul 13, 2007
Location: Skr Hts.

Re: Cleveland goes for broke with Sacramento 

Post#41 » by heathmalc » Tue Jan 27, 2009 4:57 am

bcortell wrote:Smills do you, or anyone, have the link to where it says the Cavs are looking for another PG?


There was a "rumor" on the realGM wire that the Cavs were interested in another point. However, it was based off of speculation, as the writer learned that the Cavs were interested in possibly acquiring Watson... so he "assumed" the Cavs "wanted" any point-guard. The Cavs are interested in Watson because he would bring a 1st round pick with him, offer cap flexibility next season, and could provide insurance in-case of an injury.

The Cavaliers have absolutely ZERO interest in Beno... if they had wanted him, they would have kept him after working him out before he signed with the Kings last year.


As for the original trade proposal:

#1 The Cavaliers' interest in Brad Miller is "luke warm." They have ZERO interest in acquiring John Salmons if it involves sending out a 1st round draft pick. They ARE NOT trading Eric Snow... Paper work was filed today, and after Eric meets with the Doctor, the Cavaliers will look to gain an IPE (Injured player exception). There is absolutely NO TRADE AVAILABLE where the Cavaliers would entertain trading Snow.

If the Cavaliers traded for Brad (Doubtful), it would be Brad Miller for Wally ..."Straight-up"
However, I think the Cavaliers would require a 2nd round pick from Sacramento in this trade.

Any Trade that involved Salmons, would likely be for Sasha Pavlovic... "Straight up"

I know that Sacramento fans think that their players are worth more than what I just showed in probable scenarios... but the fact is that the players you are talking about have all sorts of issues, and Salmons has been a below average player for 90% of his career...which is why he is so cheap.

Kings' fans should also note that the players we are talking about are not needed in Sacramento, and they have OBVIOUSLY not done anything to help the Kings win any games. Sacramento's own players have been publicly complaining about Miller's lack of effort.... and Salmons has been very public about his lack of playing time.

I highly doubt that the Cavaliers accept either of these two players, but if by-chance either of them do find their way to Cleveland, you can rest assured that the Cavaliers will not be sending any draft picks, and it is at least probable that Sacramento would be sending a second round pick with Miller (in a deal for Wally).
We the People...
KF10
Forum Mod - Kings
Forum Mod - Kings
Posts: 25,271
And1: 5,448
Joined: Jul 28, 2006
 

Re: Cleveland goes for broke with Sacramento 

Post#42 » by KF10 » Tue Jan 27, 2009 5:04 am

bcortell wrote:
No he isn't.


Yes, he is. Compared to Brad Miller.
bcortell
Banned User
Posts: 4,244
And1: 1
Joined: Dec 01, 2007

Re: Cleveland goes for broke with Sacramento 

Post#43 » by bcortell » Tue Jan 27, 2009 5:13 am

kingsfan10 wrote:
bcortell wrote:
No he isn't.


Yes, he is. Compared to Brad Miller.

Well he's not a post player at all anymore.. well maybe for the first three minutes of the game.. but he doesn't post up afterwards.. so he's not a post player anymore.. Two non post playing bigs playing next to each other isn't a good idea and more reason why the cavs can't play miller and z next to each other.
KF10
Forum Mod - Kings
Forum Mod - Kings
Posts: 25,271
And1: 5,448
Joined: Jul 28, 2006
 

Re: Cleveland goes for broke with Sacramento 

Post#44 » by KF10 » Tue Jan 27, 2009 5:23 am

bcortell wrote:
Well he's not a post player at all anymore.. well maybe for the first three minutes of the game.. but he doesn't post up afterwards.. so he's not a post player anymore.. Two non post playing bigs playing next to each other isn't a good idea and more reason why the cavs can't play miller and z next to each other.


Really? Not anymore? When I catch a Cavs game(s), I always see Big Z in the post, doing his thing. Heh, if you say so.

If that's the case, I could see why the Cavs are not really interested in Miller then.
bcortell
Banned User
Posts: 4,244
And1: 1
Joined: Dec 01, 2007

Re: Cleveland goes for broke with Sacramento 

Post#45 » by bcortell » Tue Jan 27, 2009 5:26 am

kingsfan10 wrote:
bcortell wrote:
Well he's not a post player at all anymore.. well maybe for the first three minutes of the game.. but he doesn't post up afterwards.. so he's not a post player anymore.. Two non post playing bigs playing next to each other isn't a good idea and more reason why the cavs can't play miller and z next to each other.


Really? Not anymore? When I catch a Cavs game(s), I always see Big Z in the post, doing his thing. Heh, if you say so.

If that's the case, I could see why the Cavs are not really interested in Miller then.

the cavs will sometimes try to establish z in the post early in the game.. that usually doesn't work.. so he stays more outside.. sometimes we try it a little later for a couple possessions..

I see him getting inside less and less and with his injury i think it will move him further from the basket.

And yes, that's why i see the cavs not having much interest in miller..
KF10
Forum Mod - Kings
Forum Mod - Kings
Posts: 25,271
And1: 5,448
Joined: Jul 28, 2006
 

Re: Cleveland goes for broke with Sacramento 

Post#46 » by KF10 » Tue Jan 27, 2009 5:31 am

Oh, ok. Thanks for your insight. Appreciated.
User avatar
Bac2Basics
RealGM
Posts: 13,588
And1: 3
Joined: Mar 03, 2001
Location: "Are you like a crazy person? I'm quite sure they will say so."
   

Re: Cleveland goes for broke with Sacramento 

Post#47 » by Bac2Basics » Tue Jan 27, 2009 7:42 am

Smills91 wrote:
Bac2Basics wrote:Cavs and Kings just aren't good trading partners

You say that on nearly every deal and its a load of crap.


I say that all the time with the Kings and Cavs because I believe it to be true, and as far as the load of crap reference.......

Hello pot, it's Kettle.
Of all the preposterous assumptions of humanity over humanity, nothing exceeds most of the criticisms made on the habits of the poor by the well-housed, well-warmed, and well-fed.
~ Herman Melville
midgman8421
Junior
Posts: 432
And1: 33
Joined: Jun 16, 2008

Re: Cleveland goes for broke with Sacramento 

Post#48 » by midgman8421 » Tue Jan 27, 2009 7:46 am

heathmalc wrote:
bcortell wrote:Smills do you, or anyone, have the link to where it says the Cavs are looking for another PG?


There was a "rumor" on the realGM wire that the Cavs were interested in another point. However, it was based off of speculation, as the writer learned that the Cavs were interested in possibly acquiring Watson... so he "assumed" the Cavs "wanted" any point-guard. The Cavs are interested in Watson because he would bring a 1st round pick with him, offer cap flexibility next season, and could provide insurance in-case of an injury.

The Cavaliers have absolutely ZERO interest in Beno... if they had wanted him, they would have kept him after working him out before he signed with the Kings last year.


As for the original trade proposal:

#1 The Cavaliers' interest in Brad Miller is "luke warm." They have ZERO interest in acquiring John Salmons if it involves sending out a 1st round draft pick. They ARE NOT trading Eric Snow... Paper work was filed today, and after Eric meets with the Doctor, the Cavaliers will look to gain an IPE (Injured player exception). There is absolutely NO TRADE AVAILABLE where the Cavaliers would entertain trading Snow.

If the Cavaliers traded for Brad (Doubtful), it would be Brad Miller for Wally ..."Straight-up"
However, I think the Cavaliers would require a 2nd round pick from Sacramento in this trade.

Any Trade that involved Salmons, would likely be for Sasha Pavlovic... "Straight up"

I know that Sacramento fans think that their players are worth more than what I just showed in probable scenarios... but the fact is that the players you are talking about have all sorts of issues, and Salmons has been a below average player for 90% of his career...which is why he is so cheap.

Kings' fans should also note that the players we are talking about are not needed in Sacramento, and they have OBVIOUSLY not done anything to help the Kings win any games. Sacramento's own players have been publicly complaining about Miller's lack of effort.... and Salmons has been very public about his lack of playing time.

I highly doubt that the Cavaliers accept either of these two players, but if by-chance either of them do find their way to Cleveland, you can rest assured that the Cavaliers will not be sending any draft picks, and it is at least probable that Sacramento would be sending a second round pick with Miller (in a deal for Wally).


*Note: Heath in no way speaks for any Cavs fans*

Of course we'd gladly throw in a first for John Salmons. Heath is (Please Use More Appropriate Word), which is why he got kicked off one of the Cavs message boards.

However, The proposed trade with the Snow/Udrih swap wouldn't work. The Cavs already have 3 capable PGs in Mo, Boobie, and Delonte. The best offer from the Cavs would be either Miller/Salmons for Wally, a pick (either our first or Chicago's second, whichever you'd like), and Darnell Jackson. Or, possibly something like Salmons and Kenny Thomas for Wally.
User avatar
heathmalc
Analyst
Posts: 3,083
And1: 16
Joined: Jul 13, 2007
Location: Skr Hts.

Re: Cleveland goes for broke with Sacramento 

Post#49 » by heathmalc » Tue Jan 27, 2009 5:29 pm

bcortell wrote:Smills do you, or anyone, have the link to where it says the Cavs are looking for another PG?


I apologize... Brian Windhorst did say that the Cavaliers were in the market for a point guard... I hadn't heard it, but a friend pointed it out to me, so I just wanted to update my last post. Here is the quote:

Hey, Brian: The Grizzlies want to trade Mike Conley, Jr. Without Delonte West, the Cavs need another point guard. Can they get him? -- Hank Jacobsen, Green

Hey, Hank: The Cavs are in the market for another point guard, as Daniel Gibson has not proven to be an effective there. But Conley is undersized and doesn't shoot well, both strikes against him.


http://www.cleveland.com/cavs/index.ssf/2009/01/hey_brian_brian_windhorst_answ_8.html

midgman8421 wrote:However, The proposed trade with the Snow/Udrih swap wouldn't work. The Cavs already have 3 capable PGs in Mo, Boobie, and Delonte.


Obviously Midgetboy (above) doesn't know much about basketball, so take anything he/she says with a grain of salt.
We the People...

Return to Trades and Transactions