DarkHawk wrote:If we plan on staying competitive, I'd like to go after Rondo simply because he can pass. It's amazing that there aren't more talented players with pass-first ability. Nash, Rondo, Rubio are the last of the elite passers I can think of.
No. We can't manage the headcases we have, and already have spacing and leadership issues. Going after Rondo is incredibly dangerous. His teammates hated him in Boston, Dallas asked him to leave in game 2 of a playoff series and his teammates there voted him out of a playoff share of salary. Rondo is still a great passer, but is a bad defender these days and constantly gambles for steals leaving his teammates out to dry, which is part of why he's so disliked.
Rubio would make more sense due to age and defense, but he's literally on pace to be the worst jump shooter ever. You'd have to have confidence Jeff can fix his jumper. Having a spacing crisis at the guard spots is a big liability. Good defensive teams will find a way to semi-double every other player and force the guy to shoot. I saw OKC do this and Rubio was out there air balling jumpers from the free throw line.
gaspar wrote:People hate Knight because he's inefficient, he shoots too much and turns the ball over too much. Apparently the answer for our problems is trading for Schroder...
eFG%: Knight .484 Schroder .471
FGA per 100 possessions: Knight 23.3 Schroder 22.8
Turnovers per 100 possessions: Knight 4.6 Schroder 4.9
It's actually pretty amazing how Knight's numbers stack up with some of the PGs people on here long for. But I'd be okay with it mostly because Schroder is 22 and does pass it more, so may be a better fit as a 1 in our system, but really he'd be a future replacement for Bledsoe, not Knight. Schroder cannot play the 2 at all.
Its been that way throughout his career. Partly because of groupthink sort of behavior and the other part is just that he has made some really poor plays at key times so it overshadows for people the positive.
gaspar wrote:People hate Knight because he's inefficient, he shoots too much and turns the ball over too much. Apparently the answer for our problems is trading for Schroder...
eFG%: Knight .484 Schroder .471
FGA per 100 possessions: Knight 23.3 Schroder 22.8
Turnovers per 100 possessions: Knight 4.6 Schroder 4.9
It's actually pretty amazing how Knight's numbers stack up with some of the PGs people on here long for. But I'd be okay with it mostly because Schroder is 22 and does pass it more, so may be a better fit as a 1 in our system, but really he'd be a future replacement for Bledsoe, not Knight. Schroder cannot play the 2 at all.
Its been that way throughout his career. Partly because of groupthink sort of behavior and the other part is just that he has made some really poor plays at key times so it overshadows for people the positive.
Or maybe we have been calling a spade a spade all along
Jonestown Suicide Squad
[. Sign the Petition To Force Sarver Into Selling Our Team
The point guard the Suns need is either not available or currently not in the NBA and they have to draft one. If Bledsoe played every game with the same effort he uses against Westbrook or Paul, then he could be the point guard of the future, but he does not. I have seen too many games where he goes through the motions with half-energy. The biggest thing the Suns miss from the Steve Nash days is the effort that Nash played with every game. He was like a machine when it came to how hard he played. 100% every game.
Playing with effort has nothing to do with talent. It has to do with desire. That is Bledsoe's biggest negative. He literally sometimes looks disinterested in games that are not against upper echelon teams. He does not bring that killer instinct. Nash would play against the worst team in the league like it is the seventh game of a playoff series. Bledsoe often plays down to the level of his competition. How many games did the Suns lose last year and the year before against awful teams. A lot. Yet they beat teams like the Thunder and Warriors and even the Spurs at home.
You either have that hate to lose mentality or you do not. I seriously question whether Bledsoe has that play every game as hard as you can demeanor. He has lots of talent but so far has shown a lack of effort and leadership and that is why I am hesitant to hand him the reigns to the team.
Ryan was on with gambo today and he sounded like there would be at least one trade prior to the deadline. I think he mentioned that he would, ideally, have multiple trades lined up.
ATTL wrote:Ryan was on with gambo today and he sounded like there would be at least one trade prior to the deadline. I think he mentioned that he would, ideally, have multiple trades lined up.
Gambo - too busy talking about his new girlfriend or saying the same things like four times in a segment (like the Cardinals lost 49-15; meaning, the Cardinals only scored 15 but the Panthers scored 49 - hence the final score 49-15 ) - to get any good news lately on the Suns. He is on lockdown mode. In the old days, he would have the trades that were going to happen.
Teletovic will probably be traded - no brainer Tucker is a possibility
Can someone explain to me what makes Markieff such an improved fit over Love on the Cavs? Yes, Love is a bad defender, but Kieff isn't exactly locking people up. Love is a great rebounder, where Kieff struggles to be average. Kieff, is a decent shooter, though Love is better with more range..both decent passers. Love is at least trying, while Kieff is not. I mean I know Love is having a hard time fitting in with Cleveland but I'm just failing to see how Kieff is that much better.
dremill24 wrote:Can someone explain to me what makes Markieff such an improved fit over Love on the Cavs? Yes, Love is a bad defender, but Kieff isn't exactly locking people up. Love is a great rebounder, where Kieff struggles to be average. Kieff, is a decent shooter, though Love is better with more range..both decent passers. Love is at least trying, while Kieff is not. I mean I know Love is having a hard time fitting in with Cleveland but I'm just failing to see how Kieff is that much better.
AtheJ415 wrote: It's actually pretty amazing how Knight's numbers stack up with some of the PGs people on here long for. But I'd be okay with it mostly because Schroder is 22 and does pass it more, so may be a better fit as a 1 in our system, but really he'd be a future replacement for Bledsoe, not Knight. Schroder cannot play the 2 at all.
Its been that way throughout his career. Partly because of groupthink sort of behavior and the other part is just that he has made some really poor plays at key times so it overshadows for people the positive.
Or maybe we have been calling a spade a spade all along
The whole point was that Knights numbers will stack up well against some of the other PG's folks seem to like. But ok... You're right, its a spade.
cosmofizzo wrote: See, if Cleveland wants to win now, I don't know how much Knight helps them. They have Kyrie and Smith to jack from distance, and Dellavadova has played well for them. What they need is help on the defensive end and, if they're losing Love, a big that can shoot. In terms of need, if I'm Cleveland, a Tucker/Telly/Keef package makes the most sense. Since that's not enough value for Love, I'd think they'd get a pick or two as well. It's not like Love as played well for a season and a half, and even before that, he was injury prone. Plus he's on a max contract. So maybe his value's not exactly astronomical.
In any case, I don't actually want Love on this team. Of course, it wouldn't surprise me in the least if McD does. I doubt we'd send him to a third team - McD wants a star. Love was a star once, and very well could be again.
Look. We all know Love doesn't play D, but he leads all PFs in TRB, is 2nd in 3PT Attempts at almost 36% (not great, but better than Kieff's 30%), and is 7th in Pts scored, 6th in FT% while being 7th in getting to the line. My point? Love is still producing at a high clip for PFs, and certainly more than Kieff, and it's not as if Kieff is playing great D either.
If we provide your trade of Teletovic, Tucker, and Kieff, then you are exactly right, we'd have to provide a pick or two back. Maybe their 2016 back, and our 2016 2nd (which will likely only be 5-8 slots behind their 1st). This deal makes much more sense, and I agree, Knight isn't going to provide them anything. Plus, why would they want to take on $14M for 4 more years?
This has been my point. jcsunsfan seems to think that $14M won't be considered a bad contract, but sorry, RIGHT NOW, he is not playing at a $14M per level...more like an $8-10M per at best. I'm not buying that Knight will be viewed as a positive. It's all "IF's" with Kieff, Knight, and Chandler...IF Kieff returns to form and stops being an idiot...IF Knight returns to playing like he did with the Bucks (he only played a handful of decent games this season; a GM is NOT going to base his value on those few games, they will base it on overall RECENT output/efficiency)...and IF Chandler can hold up beyond this season (Chandler's regressed a lot this season overall from where he was last year, AND he's 33...why would he get better? Or be consistent? or even hold up for another 4 years, worthy of $13M per).
Some may feel Cleveland will eat $35M per for the next 4 years for middling talents, while trading away a still productive and top PF in this league (offensively, at least). I'm not seeing it. GMs are not only interested in THIS season, they are interested in future seasons as well, and sucking up $35M per for the next 4 years, how will they be able to build support for LeBron if all their money tied up in Bron...and 3 NON-All-Stars. If they want to win now, WHY in the god's green earth would they trade away a borderline All-Star. They will likely trade away Varajao, Mozgov, etc. and try to bring in another All-Star, not trading away middling talents to bring in more middling talents; that does nothing for them. They will want to trade away picks, bench players, etc. to GET back ONE impact player, and sorry, but Knight, Kieff, nor Chandler are impact players...MAYBE Chandler, but again, they will not want his $13M contract through his age 37 season.
My last point on this...put this trade(Knight, Kieff, Tucker, Chandler for Love, Varajao, and Mozgov) on the Trade Forum, and see how receptive Cav fans would be. Don't bother, I already know the answer. They will want to pkg several players to get back ONE impact player.
Cavs and the city of Cleveland haven't won very much lately. I think since 1954.
The Cavs have been beaten by the Warriors and Spurs pretty badly
Its pretty easy to explain why Love for Knight/Kieff makes some sense for the Cavs
Love is not being use properly
The Cavs have a lot of BIGS costing a lot of Dan Gilberts money that do not match up against against GSW and the Spurs
Maybe the Cavs don't need Knight but Kieff would fit very well. Just making the cap and names work
One thing about Knight - counting on Iman Shumpert and JR Smith as your two guards to score is risky. Knight probably would be less risky.
How does Kieff fit in well, exactly? His .410 eFG%? His .439 TS%? His -.68 WS%? His 'big baby' attitude? His pending assault charge? Why, when Cleveland could look at a number of other PFs to trade for, why Kieff? Has anyone watched Kieff this year? I mean, at all? How is he worth $8M per for the next 3.5 years?
Everyone here suggesting that Kieff + (whatever package) for Love has yet to explain why exactly, Cleveland would choose to go after Kieff. If I'm Cleveland, and I'm looking to the Suns for a PF, I'm asking for Leuer first, Teletovic second, Len third, and then, and only then...wait, no, not even then am I asking for Kieff.
I am just flabbergasted that anyone here thinks a GM is going to call up McD and ask if Kieff is available for a trade. What's going to happen is, a GM is going to call up and ask for, in order, Booker, Len, Warren, Tucker, Leuer, Mirza, and THEN maybe Knight or Chandler. Then when a deal is about made, McD will ask "What would it take for you to take Kieff, as well?" And to that, they'll reply, "You can have X player (read: "scrub") that we have signed for 4 more years and can't get out from under, and then we'll need Cleveland's 2016 1st, and your 2016 2nd. For that, we'll take Kieff off your hands." To which, McD wll reply..."SOLD!!"
Honestly, folks, you need to step away from the proverbial 'crack pipe', and recognize that Kieff is JUNK this year...he isn't 2013-2014, 18 PER, Kieff...he isn't 2014-2015, 16 PER, Kieff...he's 2015-2016, 9 PER Kieff, that we are paying $8M for.
Kieff is trash. NOBODY is calling for Kieff as the target; if Kieff gets traded, it's because he's a throw-in part of a different deal.
And Knight? Again, why would anyone call up for the pleasure to pay $14M per, for the next 4+ years for Knight's mediocre services. A GM can get his production and efficiency for less money on a shorter deal; why on earth would a GM want that albatross hanging off his neck.
And Chandler? Same principle. What GM is thinking to himself, "You know what? I think I DO want to pay Chandler $13M in 2019 when he's 37 years old. Because, well, I can't find that kind of 'Rim Protection' somewhere else on a shorter deal."
I just do not get how anyone here thinks that any of these three guys are a hot commodity. We aren't the only team with assets for sale, and the assets we DO have that are worth anything, McD isn't going to want to trade...Len, Booker, Warren, or heck, even Tucker is more palatable, as we are only paying him $5.5M for another season after this one. Or if a team wants scoring, they'll look for Leuer or Teletovic, but not Morris...
dremill24 wrote:Can someone explain to me what makes Markieff such an improved fit over Love on the Cavs? Yes, Love is a bad defender, but Kieff isn't exactly locking people up. Love is a great rebounder, where Kieff struggles to be average. Kieff, is a decent shooter, though Love is better with more range..both decent passers. Love is at least trying, while Kieff is not. I mean I know Love is having a hard time fitting in with Cleveland but I'm just failing to see how Kieff is that much better.
8 Mil per vs 25 mil per
Not just that. Markieff can guard a combo forward. In particular he has done really well against Draymond.
Also, Kieff is an average defender legitimately. Love is arguably the worst defensive PF in basketball behind Ryan Anderson. He's not quite Kanter, but near there. What that means is other teams can pick on him defensively (similar to Harden a couple years ago). The Blazers beat Houston 2 years ago in large part by running its offense through whoever Harden happened to be guarding. You can do the same with Love in the playoffs.
NavLDO wrote: Look. We all know Love doesn't play D, but he leads all PFs in TRB, is 2nd in 3PT Attempts at almost 36% (not great, but better than Kieff's 30%), and is 7th in Pts scored, 6th in FT% while being 7th in getting to the line. My point? Love is still producing at a high clip for PFs, and certainly more than Kieff, and it's not as if Kieff is playing great D either.
If we provide your trade of Teletovic, Tucker, and Kieff, then you are exactly right, we'd have to provide a pick or two back. Maybe their 2016 back, and our 2016 2nd (which will likely only be 5-8 slots behind their 1st). This deal makes much more sense, and I agree, Knight isn't going to provide them anything. Plus, why would they want to take on $14M for 4 more years?
This has been my point. jcsunsfan seems to think that $14M won't be considered a bad contract, but sorry, RIGHT NOW, he is not playing at a $14M per level...more like an $8-10M per at best. I'm not buying that Knight will be viewed as a positive. It's all "IF's" with Kieff, Knight, and Chandler...IF Kieff returns to form and stops being an idiot...IF Knight returns to playing like he did with the Bucks (he only played a handful of decent games this season; a GM is NOT going to base his value on those few games, they will base it on overall RECENT output/efficiency)...and IF Chandler can hold up beyond this season (Chandler's regressed a lot this season overall from where he was last year, AND he's 33...why would he get better? Or be consistent? or even hold up for another 4 years, worthy of $13M per).
Some may feel Cleveland will eat $35M per for the next 4 years for middling talents, while trading away a still productive and top PF in this league (offensively, at least). I'm not seeing it. GMs are not only interested in THIS season, they are interested in future seasons as well, and sucking up $35M per for the next 4 years, how will they be able to build support for LeBron if all their money tied up in Bron...and 3 NON-All-Stars. If they want to win now, WHY in the god's green earth would they trade away a borderline All-Star. They will likely trade away Varajao, Mozgov, etc. and try to bring in another All-Star, not trading away middling talents to bring in more middling talents; that does nothing for them. They will want to trade away picks, bench players, etc. to GET back ONE impact player, and sorry, but Knight, Kieff, nor Chandler are impact players...MAYBE Chandler, but again, they will not want his $13M contract through his age 37 season.
My last point on this...put this trade(Knight, Kieff, Tucker, Chandler for Love, Varajao, and Mozgov) on the Trade Forum, and see how receptive Cav fans would be. Don't bother, I already know the answer. They will want to pkg several players to get back ONE impact player.
Cavs and the city of Cleveland haven't won very much lately. I think since 1954.
The Cavs have been beaten by the Warriors and Spurs pretty badly
Its pretty easy to explain why Love for Knight/Kieff makes some sense for the Cavs
Love is not being use properly
The Cavs have a lot of BIGS costing a lot of Dan Gilberts money that do not match up against against GSW and the Spurs
Maybe the Cavs don't need Knight but Kieff would fit very well. Just making the cap and names work
One thing about Knight - counting on Iman Shumpert and JR Smith as your two guards to score is risky. Knight probably would be less risky.
How does Kieff fit in well, exactly? His .410 eFG%? His .439 TS%? His -.68 WS%? His 'big baby' attitude? His pending assault charge? Why, when Cleveland could look at a number of other PFs to trade for, why Kieff? Has anyone wathed Kieff this year? I mean, at all? How is he worth $8M per for the next 3.5 years?
Everyone here suggesting that Kieff + (whatever package) for Love has yet to explain why exactly, Cleveland would choose to go after Kieff. If I'm Cleveland, and I'm looking to the Suns for a PF, I'm asking for Leuer first, Teletovic second, Len third, and then, and only then...wait, no, not even then am I asking for Kieff.
I am just flabbergasted that anyone here thinks a GM is going to call up McD and ask if Kieff is available for a trade. What's going to happen is, a GM is going to call up and ask for, in order, Booker, Len, Warren, Tucker, Leuer, Mirza, and THEN maybe Knight or Chandler. Then when a deal is about made, McD will ask "What would it take for you to take Kieff, as well?" And to that, they'll reply, "You can have X player (read=scrub) that we have signed for 4 more years and can't get out from under, and then we'll need Cleveland's 2016 1st, and your 2016 2nd. For that, we'll take Kieff off your hands." To which, McD wll reply..."SOLD!!"
Honestly, folks, you need to step away from the proverbial 'crack pipe', and recognize that Kieff is JUNK this year...he isn't 2013-2014, 18 PER, Kieff...he isn't 2014-2015, 16 PER, Kieff...he's 2015-2016, 9 PER Kieff, that we are paying $8M for.
Kieff is trash. NOBODY is calling for Kieff as the target; if Kieff gets traded, it's because he's a throw-in part of a different deal.
And Knight? Again, why would anyone call up for the pleasure to pay $14M per, for the next 4+ years for Knight's mediocre services. A GM can get his production and efficiency for less money on a shorter deal; why on earth would a GM want that albatross hanging off his neck.
And Chandler? Same principle. What GM is thinking to himself, "You know what? I think I DO want to pay Chandler $13M in 2019 when he's 37 years old. Because, well, I can't find that kind of 'Rim Protection' somewhere else on a shorter deal."
I just do not get how anyone here thinks that any of these three guys are a hot commodity. We aren't the only team with assets for sale, and the assets we DO have that are worth anything, McD isn't going to want to trade...Len, Booker, Warren, or heck, even Tucker is more palatable, as we are only paying him $5.5M for another season after this one. Or if a team wants scoring, they'll look for Leuer or Teletovic, but not Morris...
Thank you for being the voice of reason, Nav. This is getting out of hand....
Jonestown Suicide Squad
[. Sign the Petition To Force Sarver Into Selling Our Team
letsgosuns wrote:The point guard the Suns need is either not available or currently not in the NBA and they have to draft one. If Bledsoe played every game with the same effort he uses against Westbrook or Paul, then he could be the point guard of the future, but he does not. I have seen too many games where he goes through the motions with half-energy. The biggest thing the Suns miss from the Steve Nash days is the effort that Nash played with every game. He was like a machine when it came to how hard he played. 100% every game.
Playing with effort has nothing to do with talent. It has to do with desire. That is Bledsoe's biggest negative. He literally sometimes looks disinterested in games that are not against upper echelon teams. He does not bring that killer instinct. Nash would play against the worst team in the league like it is the seventh game of a playoff series. Bledsoe often plays down to the level of his competition. How many games did the Suns lose last year and the year before against awful teams. A lot. Yet they beat teams like the Thunder and Warriors and even the Spurs at home.
You either have that hate to lose mentality or you do not. I seriously question whether Bledsoe has that play every game as hard as you can demeanor. He has lots of talent but so far has shown a lack of effort and leadership and that is why I am hesitant to hand him the reigns to the team.
I agree Bledsoe is not as good as Nash. Bledsoe doesn't bring it all the time, but he was ranked fairly on in the league on most advanced numbers....like top 25. He's still by far our best player.
I think if we constantly measure up everyone against Nash, it will bring disappointment.
AtheJ415 wrote:We could trade: Knight, Kieff, Tucker, and Chandler to Cleveland for: Love, Varajeo, and Mozgov.
In terms of talent, Cleveland gets a massive defensive upgrade at the 3-5 spots and offensive downgrade, but since Lebron and Irving and JR take 90% of their shots, it probably makes them a better team. They also have Knight who can be damn good if used correctly and his discipline is improved. We get Love and about $6 mill in cap space, plus another $5 when Mozgov expires. We'd have to eat Varajeo's awful deal for 1 more year, but it's unguaranteed for 2017.
Phoenix could then use cap space to go after Barnes, Fournier, or Whiteside. Not likely we get any, but we'd potentially have the space to do it.
We could also throw in Tele if needed, netting us Cunningham (at least he's young and has talent), and Kaun if more was needed.
We'd also have our first rounder to add a PF in all likelihood, or Dunn. I'm not a huge Love fan for this team, but if we could get Whiteside somehow instead of Chandler, it would change things since our age grouping would look a hell of a lot better with 26 year old Whiteside instead of 35 year old Chandler.
That is a lowball offer from Phoenix. You can't keep a entire core and get love just not realistic. It would take 2/3 of Booker/Warren or Len along with multiple picks and markieff etc.
I think it really makes Cleveland much tougher and deeper. You add Markieff, Chandler, and Tucker to a team like Cleveland, and subtract Love, who really doesn't get high usage, even though the talent could be lopsided, it just balance their roster well. And no one would push them around ever.
Again, I don't think Cleveland is going to care about draft picks....it is ALL about winning NOW THIS YEAR and they clearly are a notch below the top couple of teams. LeBron is a free agent too I think or has a player option. If some of the players want Kieff and are/were already speculating Love may be traded, it might not be out of the question.
Would make them slightly better but not put them over the edge. No way they do it the publicity they will take for trading away Wiggins for love to downgrade to that is just a dream. Yeah cavs are in win now mode but picks still hold value for them to trade them for other pieces and that's exactly why they would demand them.
They would want Len over Tyson IMO for cap reasons to trade the picks they acquired on other holes. Markieff they'd take too but they will want booker it's guaranteed you have to pay to get a player like that. Regardless if he's not fitting in you have to compete with the rest of the league offers as well.
oldscho0led wrote:Baseball is all about momentum. Pirates will carry their winning ways and beat Giants in the Wildcard.
A's over Royals. Lester and experience will prove that he's worth the trade.
Tigers winning it all. Tigers are, imo, peaking at the right time.
That is a lowball offer from Phoenix. You can't keep a entire core and get love just not realistic. It would take 2/3 of Booker/Warren or Len along with multiple picks and markieff etc.
I think it really makes Cleveland much tougher and deeper. You add Markieff, Chandler, and Tucker to a team like Cleveland, and subtract Love, who really doesn't get high usage, even though the talent could be lopsided, it just balance their roster well. And no one would push them around ever.
Again, I don't think Cleveland is going to care about draft picks....it is ALL about winning NOW THIS YEAR and they clearly are a notch below the top couple of teams. LeBron is a free agent too I think or has a player option. If some of the players want Kieff and are/were already speculating Love may be traded, it might not be out of the question.
Would make them slightly better but not put them over the edge. No way they do it the publicity they will take for trading away Wiggins for love to downgrade to that is just a dream. Yeah cavs are in win now mode but picks still hold value for them to trade them for other pieces and that's exactly why they would demand them.
They would want Len over Tyson IMO for cap reasons to trade the picks they acquired on other holes. Markieff they'd take too but they will want booker it's guaranteed you have to pay to get a player like that. Regardless if he's not fitting in you have to compete with the rest of the league offers as well.
I don't think a trade is going to happen, but I don't think they'd want Len for the same reasons. They want to win NOW. Like THIS YEAR or if not, over the next couple of years. Tyson is a much smarter player to play with those vets.
25 or so teams would want Len over Chandler, but they are one of the 5 or so that wouldn't imo.
That is a lowball offer from Phoenix. You can't keep a entire core and get love just not realistic. It would take 2/3 of Booker/Warren or Len along with multiple picks and markieff etc.
I think it really makes Cleveland much tougher and deeper. You add Markieff, Chandler, and Tucker to a team like Cleveland, and subtract Love, who really doesn't get high usage, even though the talent could be lopsided, it just balance their roster well. And no one would push them around ever.
Again, I don't think Cleveland is going to care about draft picks....it is ALL about winning NOW THIS YEAR and they clearly are a notch below the top couple of teams. LeBron is a free agent too I think or has a player option. If some of the players want Kieff and are/were already speculating Love may be traded, it might not be out of the question.
Would make them slightly better but not put them over the edge. No way they do it the publicity they will take for trading away Wiggins for love to downgrade to that is just a dream. Yeah cavs are in win now mode but picks still hold value for them to trade them for other pieces and that's exactly why they would demand them.
They would want Len over Tyson IMO for cap reasons to trade the picks they acquired on other holes. Markieff they'd take too but they will want booker it's guaranteed you have to pay to get a player like that. Regardless if he's not fitting in you have to compete with the rest of the league offers as well.
Yeah. The Cavs want picks and are concerned with publicity. That's why the GM was okay firing a coach even though it made it look like Lebron was running the team, while shopping Mozgov a year after dumping 2 first rounders for him. They're also concerned with cap flexibility, which is why they'd prefer Len to save 9 mil.
Look at their cap and tell me going for cap flexibility is a good or even possible move. To sign guys not on your team, you have to get all the way under the cap. The Cavs have $113 million in salary right now with a cap of $70 million and $84.7 million is the luxury threshold. That's right, they were and are so concerned with cap flexibility that they signed a bunch of role players to huge deals and now, even if they gave Love away, they literally could not sign anybody other than a league minimum player because they'd still be $7 million OVER THE LUXURY THRESHOLD.
You need to stop looking at the current Cavs as if they operate in any way with the same future and cap implications in mind as other teams. That is simply not the position they are in. They are the 2001 Diamondbacks. They are all in to win now, and have already shown they're willing to overspend in picks to get guys that will help them win now, and spend anything to keep players, meaning free agency is no longer an option. If Love is moved, it will be for the best players they can get over the next 3 years. It won't be to add somebody who will help them half a decade from now.
Also, I'm not sure if they got a pick, they could trade it for a player, even with a trade exception, due to their being over the luxury tax.
