Trade & FA Ideas & Discussion

[BobbieL]

I actually don't mind that either

Ulis
Booker
Jackson
Warren
Bender or Chriss

Start that lineup for the next two years and let them learn to play together.

Irving to the Knicks
Melo and Bledsoe to the Cavs
For the Suns, enough salary from Cavs on expiring deals to legitimize the deal in trade checker plus two young assets or picks

Fixed ... put Warren in there

the closest I can get is the following
Cleveland: Melo, Bled, Chriss, Heat Pick
Knicks: Kyrie and Chandler
Suns: Frank N, Frye Jefferson, O Quinn and Shumpert

Suns trading Bledsoe Chriss, Chandler, heat pick for Frank N, Shumpert , OQuinn and expirings

Closest to what exactly? Making a stupid trade?

You are right. I should have clarified - "the closest I can get with the salaries in the ESPN Trade Machine but I wouldn't do it " is the below - but yes, that was a horrible trade to only net Frank N and Shumpert

The Suns should give up those players for Kyrie, not Frank N

[NavLDO]

Gambo update:
- Josh Jackson is not being traded, 2018 Pick highly unlikely to be traded.
- Reiterates sources tell him 0% chance Irving gets traded to Phoenix, not even 1%, specifically 0%.

I don't mind the small ball lineup because we need to figure out if it works before we're a contender. The Miami and GSW teams weren't good rebounders so can we get the same benefits to outweight the costs.

He's right. At this time there's a 0% chance he gets traded here w/o JJ being included but Cleveland's GM said himself it's a "fluid situation". As time goes on things can change.

TBH, I don't think Gilbert trades him unless a Wiggins-caliber package is coming back.

So...a 'Warren-caliber' pkg, then. But since we are out of the hunt, it'll be another team.

I know, a lot of you are moaning...'no, Warren is not of Wiggins caliber...', well, to that I say, why then, do most of the Advanced stats say otherwise?

http://bkref.com/tiny/oeJt5

http://www.boxscoregeeks.com/players?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=warren
http://www.boxscoregeeks.com/players?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=wiggins

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1CA4KxmzjZrTlYqxNU85jkUnCcqvJjsP5LT818LSYjkk/edit#gid=0
(Not sure how this will come across to anyone else, but point, Warren is 1074th, Wiggins is 1356th - neither stellar, but another point...Len is 586th...

http://insider.espn.com/nba/hollinger/statistics/_/position/sf/league/west
http://insider.espn.com/nba/hollinger/statistics/_/position/sg/league/west

These last two show mixed results, but with Wiggins getting more playing time, his Usage rate is going to be higher, but again, these are split--Warren has him in all the Reb, TS%, TOV, but loses out PER, VA, and EWA...for last season ONLY...

OK, getting off my...

[BobbieL]

I heard Gambo. I think he was a little dramatic. I think there is a chance the Suns get Irving without giving up Jackson. Seems like there is area to negotiate. Suns can make a good offer that other teams can't.

The deal might not go through but I think there is a chance unlike what Gambo said

I think the Suns offerings are trumped IF minnesota is willing to give up Wiggins, and the Heat is willing to send out Winslow, then Cleveland has the coveted blue chip players they are looking for.

I doubt Minnesota would trade Wiggins, but Dragic/Winslow for Kyrie seems like a typical Pat Riley move. Also brings back backcourt '12 (Irving and Waiters).

If they covet Winslow so be it, but he has proven absolutely 0 to justify being called a blue chip prospect.

The deals that I see better than the Suns for Irving are - if true

1) Minnesota: Teague and Wiggins but is that even true. Maybe its just Wiggins, Dieng or Aldrich and a draft pick - but if true Wiggins is a top prize. Not sure how much cap space they can take on but they can add a first rounder I think

2) Dragic Winslow Ellington for Shumpert, Jefferson Kyrie: that's pretty good for the Heat. Probably no draft picks. But Dragic is much older than Kyrie and no draft picks doesn't help Cleveland after this year.

3) Denver: Jamal Murray would be a good get with players like Chandler and Nelson for Kyrie and Jefferson. Probably a draft pick

So, I do think the Suns have things to offer. But other teams - to me especially Minnesota and if Murray is in the game, Denver.

but the Heat pick is the first rounder in play. The Suns pick in 2018 is not in play unless lottery protected - at least top 10

The picks in play are the Heat pick, Suns 2 second rounders for me

[BobbieL]

I actually don't mind that either

Ulis
Booker
Jackson
Warren
Bender or Chriss

Start that lineup for the next two years and let them learn to play together.

Irving to the Knicks
Melo and Bledsoe to the Cavs
For the Suns, enough salary from Cavs on expiring deals to legitimize the deal in trade checker plus two young assets or picks

Fixed ... put Warren in there

the closes I can get is the following
Cleveland: Melo, Bled, Chriss, Heat Pick
Knicks: Kyrie and Chandler
Suns: Frank N, Frye Jefferson, O Quinn and Shumpert

Suns trading Bledsoe Chriss, Chandler, heat pick for Frank N, Shumpert , OQuinn and expirings

I don't totally mind Bledsoe for Frank N, but WHY Bled AND Chriss AND taking on a bad contract for Frank? You like him THAT much?

No, it was a horrible trade for the Suns - just trying to make dollars work in the trade machine. You are right, giving up Chriss, Bledsoe and Heat pick is way to much for Frank N. Subtract out the Heat pick or Chriss and the Knicks need to add a draft pick or two

[darealjuice]

Minnesota can't even trade Teague right now lol so no, it's not true. A lot of rumors have been saying they don't even want to trade Wiggins straight up as the main piece for Kyrie.

I think be can beat just about any team's reasonable offer for Kyrie, but I don't know if we value Kyrie enough to actually do it.

[Gorilla Warfare]

I said it before and I'll say it again. Even without including Jackson in a trade, Bledsoe and any other player (except Booker) along with a Miami pick is a more than fair offer that likely would not be beat for Kyrie. They can take it or leave it. I'm good either way.

My personal preference would be to not have that other player be Chriss, because he really could be our next Amare, just has to adjust to the muscle added and calm down on the court.

[bwgood77]

Kyrie won't be an all-star in the west.

Pure genius.

Steve Nash probably would not make the all star team in the West in today's NBA.

What decade and how will we acquire a player of Kyrie's skill level? I could care less if he is an All Star. I just want this team to get better. I can understand some of the concerns, but we and the Cavaliers are in charge of what happens to him for the next 2 years. We have proven we cannot attract any legit free agents so why not at least try to get him with reasonable resources. If he sucks as bad as a lot or you think, it helps the tank and really does nothing to hurt our future. That is unless you are in love with Bledsoe and want to max him out in two years.

We still do not have a clue who our bigs are going to be going forward. We hope Bender and Chriss pan out, but who really knows. If we stick with Bledsoe, it is either him or the use of another high draft pick to replace him. Next year is suppose to be a big man's draft. It would be a shame to pass on a legit big to bring in another PG.

What this comes down to is who would your rather have going forward: Bledsoe or Kyrie

That is the decision and it has nothing to do with the All Star game.

My line was in response to the idea that Kyrie being an all-star was, along with 2 other all-stars, something that makes us obvious contenders. Which is, in and of itself, a totally bogus notion and... as said... he won't be an all-star anyway.

And not that it matters, but Nash of 2005-2010 would absolutely 100% be an all-star in today's west. Even ignoring his gaudy shooting numbers, the league leader in assists is basically an all-star lock.

As for Kyrie, I've made my opinion plain and it is not about losing Bledsoe, it is that I think Kyrie is fools gold. And there is absolutely risk involved. It is hard to develop players when your offense is being ran through a guy who wants to shot 25 times a game, dribbles the clock away, does nothing to make the lives of his teammates easier and cannot be bothered to make an effort defensively. I think him and Booker would be a terrible pairing and I think we'd be stuck having to choose between them, all the while never escaping being sub mediocre.

Kyrie is a very talented player, I just doubt his talent translates into winning NBA basketball when one of the best players in league history isn't out there next to him making him seem much more efficient and masking his many weaknesses.

I agree. He plays the exact type of basketball many people seem to hate, but many ignore that because he's looked good next to LeBron covering his weaknesses, allowing him to focus solely on his strengths. He does that on a team like ours, it might make him look good....a nice advertisement for free agency at the detriment of the team and our players developing. He would want all the game winning shots, and theoretically he SHOULD take them over Booker, but Booker may like his chances too, and to develop his confidence and get his looks.

Not only is he not the right player for our team right now, we definitely should not put any picks that could be top 5-7 or any young players in the deal. We can't afford to when a team on his list will likely offer the max when he's a free agency ready to make his way to one of them. Playing near home in NY with all the hype, or playing with his buddy Jimmy will likely be what he wants to do if we don't pony up the $35 million a year to keep him the same year we extend Booker, who will likely be eligible for less.

[bwgood77]

Kyrie won't be an all-star in the west.

Pure genius.

Steve Nash probably would not make the all star team in the West in today's NBA.

What decade and how will we acquire a player of Kyrie's skill level? I could care less if he is an All Star. I just want this team to get better. I can understand some of the concerns, but we and the Cavaliers are in charge of what happens to him for the next 2 years. We have proven we cannot attract any legit free agents so why not at least try to get him with reasonable resources. If he sucks as bad as a lot or you think, it helps the tank and really does nothing to hurt our future. That is unless you are in love with Bledsoe and want to max him out in two years.

We still do not have a clue who our bigs are going to be going forward. We hope Bender and Chriss pan out, but who really knows. If we stick with Bledsoe, it is either him or the use of another high draft pick to replace him. Next year is suppose to be a big man's draft. It would be a shame to pass on a legit big to bring in another PG.

What this comes down to is who would your rather have going forward: Bledsoe or Kyrie

That is the decision and it has nothing to do with the All Star game.

My line was in response to the idea that Kyrie being an all-star was, along with 2 other all-stars, something that makes us obvious contenders. Which is, in and of itself, a totally bogus notion and... as said... he won't be an all-star anyway.

And not that it matters, but Nash of 2005-2010 would absolutely 100% be an all-star in today's west. Even ignoring his gaudy shooting numbers, the league leader in assists is basically an all-star lock.

As for Kyrie, I've made my opinion plain and it is not about losing Bledsoe, it is that I think Kyrie is fools gold. And there is absolutely risk involved. It is hard to develop players when your offense is being ran through a guy who wants to shot 25 times a game, dribbles the clock away, does nothing to make the lives of his teammates easier and cannot be bothered to make an effort defensively. I think him and Booker would be a terrible pairing and I think we'd be stuck having to choose between them, all the while never escaping being sub mediocre.

Kyrie is a very talented player, I just doubt his talent translates into winning NBA basketball when one of the best players in league history isn't out there next to him making him seem much more efficient and masking his many weaknesses.

I agree. He plays the exact type of basketball many people seem to hate, but many ignore that because he's looked good next to LeBron covering his weaknesses, allowing him to focus solely on his strengths. He does that on a team like ours, it might make him look good....a nice advertisement for free agency at the detriment of the team and our players developing. He would want all the game winning shots, and theoretically he SHOULD take them over Booker, but Booker may like his chances too, and to develop his confidence and get his looks.

Not only is he not the right player for our team right now, we definitely should not put any picks that could be top 5-7 or any young players in the deal. We can't afford to when a team on his list will likely offer the max when he's a free agency ready to make his way to one of them. Playing near home in NY with all the hype, or playing with his buddy Jimmy will likely be what he wants to do if we don't pony up the $35 million a year to keep him the same year we extend Booker, who will be eligible for less.

[gaspar]

Read on Twitter

[BobbieL]

Minnesota can't even trade Teague right now lol so no, it's not true. A lot of rumors have been saying they don't even want to trade Wiggins straight up as the main piece for Kyrie.

I think be can beat just about any team's reasonable offer for Kyrie, but I don't know if we value Kyrie enough to actually do it.

This is what I think too. The Suns can check a lot of boxes for Cleveland while not giving up Jackson. The Suns can protect their own pick to say Top 10 or just offer the Heat pick/their second rounder. The Suns also can blend veterans plus a young player and finally, they can take on Shumpert and possibly Frye or Shumpert/Jefferson =- saving Dan Gilbert like 40 to 50m.

http://hoopshype.com/2017/07/28/spurs-clippers-wolves-knicks-suns-heat-made-offer-for-kyrie-irving/

Woj Says six teams have called

Read on Twitter

Clippers don't have a first rounder - Austin Rivers, Beverly, Williams, hardly
Spurs can offer Murray, Green, maybe Aldridge - not sure that's a fit

I think the Suns can be in this not giving up Jackson or their own pick

[Mulhollanddrive]

Nobody would have predicted Lavine, Oladipo, Hield as the deciding factors to get Butler, George, Cousins.

Whichever young prospect Cleveland's FO likes most probably decides the deal, whether it's Jamal Murray, Justice Winslow, Frank Ntilikina, TJ Warren who knows.

[bwgood77]

Personally, if we get late into offseason without any changes (trades), I would do that - give him 15 mil, on a 1 year deal. We have the money to spend and we want to make agents happy and friendly towards us (helps with future signings of FA's we want), so it could work. Also wouldn't limit us next year.

Why? It sets a salary expectation that is unrealistic. You needlessly give him 15 mil for one year and now, if he isn't great but isn't awful, you've gotta at least get to that level to keep him the following one. Virtually no young player takes a pay cut to stay with the same team.

If it gets late in the offseason, like you say, and he still is unsigned then let him sign the 4.2 million qualifying offer... because it's what the market left him with.

If you wanted to keep him anyway by extending the QO, why not give him a little bit more with a team option for the following year or a 3 year at a low offer with that team option when we need to extend Booker (and maybe Irving), or even not guarantee 2nd and 3rd years if he'd go for that.

[bwgood77]

I believe the west is so stacked atm even if we got Irving for nothing like literally nothing.... I don't think we are a playoff team. That's why IMO I just want to focus on the rebuild. If we could be the 3rd team in a trade and get some young prospects back I'm down.

I mean you can look at two teams who had a rocky path but are on their way to both make the playoffs...

Philly and the wolves....

It took them awhile but they stayed the course and will both be better than us.

Realistically we cant win now with he stacked west. And I don't want to **** up our future either...

I guess my over all point is you don't want to trade any assets until you are in WIN NOW mode. And we are far from it.

Although we are high on prospects like Bender, Chirss, and Jackson we really don't know what we are dealing with yet.

Once you know and have a solid foundation you go in.

We could get better value in the next few years for what we are supposedly offering for Irving now.

Patienceeeeeee

Amen to that. Sarver and so many fans keep going back and wanting to continue to try and fast forward to get to that 8 spot, and we likely fall short of that anyway, potentially at the detriment of our youth's development. Stick to the timeline.

[jredsaz]

Gambo also keeps saying that the Suns 2018 1st is almost completly off the table as well. That might be the piece that ultimately gets the deal done.

What about:

Bledsoe, PHX 1st (2018)

For Irving, Frye

Pick is unprotected in the year they may lose LeBron. They save $$$. Idk if I would do it. Probably would. But Irving was a #1 pick.

Sent from my SM-N920V using RealGM mobile app

Hell no. If you are in Phx's situation, you would rather have 1 of Doncic, Porter, Ayton, or Bamba than Kyrie just out of fit and age and salary. Let alone the leverage of the situation. Phoenix doesn't need to up its offer until a better offer comes along. Until then, Phoenix shouldn't be in a rush b/c Cleveland is the time under the gun right now. The longer this drags out the worse it is for them.

I've never seen a person more certain about unproven talent. I don't think this would be "upping the offer" necessarily. If they already have offered Warren or Bender or Chriss, three players you praise on this board all the time, giving them that pick in this scenario allows us to keep those players. The high school athletes you listed have not even stepped on a college court yet.

Anyway, like I said, I don't know if I would do it but dismissing it out of hand is laughable. You have become a tanking ideolog. Lol

Sent from my SM-N920V using RealGM mobile app

[jredsaz]

Nobody would have predicted Lavine, Oladipo, Hield as the deciding factors to get Butler, George, Cousins.

Whichever young prospect Cleveland's FO likes most probably decides the deal, whether it's Jamal Murray, Justice Winslow, Frank Ntilikina, TJ Warren who knows.

And I don't think Murray is on the table.

Sent from my SM-N920V using RealGM mobile app

[Mulhollanddrive]

If Minnesota don't offer Wiggins I think we're equal favourite with a package of Bledsoe, Warren, Miami.

[carey]

And I don't think Murray is on the table.

Why wouldn't he be?

[JMac1]

I would trade a top 5 protected 2018 Suns' pick with Bledsoe and Chriss (preferably) or Warren for Irving. We did for Knight.

[Mulhollanddrive]

What are Minnesota even offering without Wiggins.

[bwgood77]

I said it before and I'll say it again. Even without including Jackson in a trade, Bledsoe and any other player (except Booker) along with a Miami pick is a more than fair offer that likely would not be beat for Kyrie. They can take it or leave it. I'm good either way.

My personal preference would be to not have that other player be Chriss, because he really could be our next Amare, just has to adjust to the muscle added and calm down on the court.

I am starting to think we can beat just about any other team with something like that if we include a young player, mainly because Bledsoe is the better PG, because we also have picks and young players. But if they want a young player, and don't like ours, who knows?

The one team that could absolutely beat us is Boston. Now I think they SHOULD get in the mix, and even throw IT in there. Even though IT was better this past season, has a better TS%, eFG%, passes more, etc, and advanced #s favored him, he's 3 years older and I think Irving would put up even better numbers in Boston, and if I was Boston, I'd prefer to give him the max over IT.

Several suitors contend there are two teams with the best ability to make deals for Irving: the Suns and Boston Celtics. So far, the Suns are unwilling to include No. 4 overall pick Josh Jackson in a trade, league sources said. The Celtics are monitoring, but it's unclear how aggressive they'll get -- and how motivated the Cavaliers would be to make a deal with their fiercest conference rival.

http://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/20177155/kyrie-irving-trade-talks-show-how-much-teams-including-cleveland-cavaliers-value-him

They have a boatload of picks, IT, and a bunch of young guys and a vet to throw in. They could offer IT, a couple of their own picks, and Tatum or Brown....or they could throw in Crowder. If they want to keep both Tatum and Brown, give Crowder and another young guy like Ojeleye and/or Zizic.

They have all sorts of young guys and picks.

I'm not sure the Cavs would be willing to deal with Boston, but they should look into it if they want the best assets. Boston has been stubborn, but this is the one deal where IT is replaceable, and they wouldn't have to max IT.