Page 6 of 94
Re: The Love-Wiggins Deal Thread
Posted: Fri Jul 18, 2014 10:23 am
by longstrangetrip [enjin:6600564]
lipoli390 wrote:AbeVigodaLive wrote:This trade just in:
Love, Dieng, LaVine for Wiggins, Bennett, future 1st
Don't you love how wide the gap is in these proposed trades? Personally, I think the one above is fucking terrible. But, I don't see Cleveland doing the one proposed earlier in this thread either.
As usual, it will probably shake out somewhere in between... if it happens.
I'd rather keep Love than do that deal. The Cavs can have anyone with Love other than Rubio, Dieng or LaVine. I might part with Shabazz if necessary but only as a last resort.
Obviously that deal doesn't even come close to matching salaries, and is insulting besides. Abe, who is the source of that rumor, so I can add them to my Bill Simmons list?
Re: The Love-Wiggins Deal Thread
Posted: Fri Jul 18, 2014 10:25 am
by AbeVigodaLive
lipoli390 wrote:AbeVigodaLive wrote:This trade just in:
Love, Dieng, LaVine for Wiggins, Bennett, future 1st
Don't you love how wide the gap is in these proposed trades? Personally, I think the one above is fucking terrible. But, I don't see Cleveland doing the one proposed earlier in this thread either.
As usual, it will probably shake out somewhere in between... if it happens.
I'd rather keep Love than do that deal. The Cavs can have anyone with Love other than Rubio, Dieng or LaVine. I might part with Shabazz if necessary but only as a last resort.
I'd have no problem getting rid of Muhammad.
I think he offers a very narrow skillset that is not unique enough (in a good way) to make a consistent impact.
He's an undersized inside scorer with poor handles and no ability to pass. Being able to put the ball in the basket is always a good thing... but I just don't know if a very very very poor man's Adrian Dantley type is going to cut it in today's league.
Re: The Love-Wiggins Deal Thread
Posted: Fri Jul 18, 2014 10:26 am
by Coolbreeze44
I don't understand the valuation put on Shabazz. Let him go as far as I'm concerned. We absolutely must keep Lavine and Dieng.
Re: The Love-Wiggins Deal Thread
Posted: Fri Jul 18, 2014 10:38 am
by worldK
CoolBreeze44 wrote:I don't understand the valuation put on Shabazz. Let him go as far as I'm concerned. We absolutely must keep Lavine and Dieng.
Agree cool. Rubio,lavine and dieng are three guys we should keep and build around. Hopefully wiggins can be added into that core. Shabazz can go in my opinion. He just doesn't impress me. I honestly find it hard to see shabazz being a regular rotation player for a good team in the league to be honest. He works his butt off and has high motor but he only does so offensively. Defensively he has been bad and just doesn't have the natural feel for playing defense.
That rumored deal that Abe posted is terrible.
Re: The Love-Wiggins Deal Thread
Posted: Fri Jul 18, 2014 10:38 am
by longstrangetrip [enjin:6600564]
I completely concur that our only untouchables now are Dieng, LaVine and Rubio...everyone else is expendable.
I love Shabazz' ability to score in bunches, but he will never be a complete basketball player or anything close.
I'm choosing to just ignore whoever started the rumor that Lavine and Deing are in a deal, or even that the Cavs are still asking for them. I have to assume this deal is further along than that. Smh
Re: The Love-Wiggins Deal Thread
Posted: Fri Jul 18, 2014 10:48 am
by AbeVigodaLive
The rumored trade I posted wasn't in any way posted as a feasible option.
It was to show you just how much speculation remains. And how wide it is.
That trade is ridiculous. And many would claim the other trade with Waiters included may be just as ridiculous.
Re: The Love-Wiggins Deal Thread
Posted: Fri Jul 18, 2014 10:49 am
by mjs34
I don't see anyone as untouchable other than Rubio, and that is because I don't see us getting significant value back for him. Particularly now that he is looking to be drastically overpaid.
Re: The Love-Wiggins Deal Thread
Posted: Fri Jul 18, 2014 10:52 am
by mjs34
lipoli390 wrote:sjm34 wrote:To make the numbers work Cleveland will likely have to add haywood and felix while taking back Turiaf. It is the only way Cleveland keeps a C on the roster, while satisfying the CBA rules that I think makes sense.
http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=oze395y
I think you're right, unless the Cavs have cap room not reflected in the ESPN trade machine. That could be possible if the Cavs haven't picked up the option on Varejao. My sense is that the ESPN trade machine is correct, which means the latest report isn't completely accurate.
Another way for the deal to work without the Cavs giving up Haywood would be Bennett and Thompson instead of Waiters and Thompson. Then the Cavs would just need to throw in Felix or Dellavedova to make the deal work. I tend to think that's the most likely deal. Why? Several reasons. First, it works under the CBA without the Cavs giving up there only big guy. Second, Waiters fills more of a need on the Cavs than Bennett does because Bennett plays the positions that will be occupied by Love and LeBron while the Cavs don't even have a sure starter at SG ahead if Waiters. Finally, the Cavs are clearly in a win-now mode. Waiters played substantial minutes last season and put up good numbers. In contrast, Bennett was absolutely horrible last season and has yet to show he is an NBA player.
That does make things easier Lip. Bennett scares me for two reasons. He was really bad last season, and I have always looked at him as a tweener, and those guys usually succeed due to there aggressive nature, which I don't see in Bennett. I think Waiters would have more value if we wanted to move him for something else.
Re: The Love-Wiggins Deal Thread
Posted: Fri Jul 18, 2014 10:58 am
by Monster
Its sort of a sidenote but to me it seems like Bennett being a likely tweener might be more worthwhile for the Cavs than most teams since Lebron can play position besides C. A lot of teams have a weak player at PF or SF offensively so Bennett could play those guys or even a C on defense. He is a potential guy at this point barely more of a proven asset than a rookie because he was hurt sucked now lost weight etc.
Re: The Love-Wiggins Deal Thread
Posted: Fri Jul 18, 2014 11:04 am
by Lipoli390
sjm34 wrote:lipoli390 wrote:sjm34 wrote:To make the numbers work Cleveland will likely have to add haywood and felix while taking back Turiaf. It is the only way Cleveland keeps a C on the roster, while satisfying the CBA rules that I think makes sense.
http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=oze395y
I think you're right, unless the Cavs have cap room not reflected in the ESPN trade machine. That could be possible if the Cavs haven't picked up the option on Varejao. My sense is that the ESPN trade machine is correct, which means the latest report isn't completely accurate.
Another way for the deal to work without the Cavs giving up Haywood would be Bennett and Thompson instead of Waiters and Thompson. Then the Cavs would just need to throw in Felix or Dellavedova to make the deal work. I tend to think that's the most likely deal. Why? Several reasons. First, it works under the CBA without the Cavs giving up there only big guy. Second, Waiters fills more of a need on the Cavs than Bennett does because Bennett plays the positions that will be occupied by Love and LeBron while the Cavs don't even have a sure starter at SG ahead if Waiters. Finally, the Cavs are clearly in a win-now mode. Waiters played substantial minutes last season and put up good numbers. In contrast, Bennett was absolutely horrible last season and has yet to show he is an NBA player.
That does make things easier Lip. Bennett scares me for two reasons. He was really bad last season, and I have always looked at him as a tweener, and those guys usually succeed due to there aggressive nature, which I don't see in Bennett. I think Waiters would have more value if we wanted to move him for something else.
sjm34 wrote:lipoli390 wrote:sjm34 wrote:To make the numbers work Cleveland will likely have to add haywood and felix while taking back Turiaf. It is the only way Cleveland keeps a C on the roster, while satisfying the CBA rules that I think makes sense.
http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=oze395y
I think you're right, unless the Cavs have cap room not reflected in the ESPN trade machine. That could be possible if the Cavs haven't picked up the option on Varejao. My sense is that the ESPN trade machine is correct, which means the latest report isn't completely accurate.
Another way for the deal to work without the Cavs giving up Haywood would be Bennett and Thompson instead of Waiters and Thompson. Then the Cavs would just need to throw in Felix or Dellavedova to make the deal work. I tend to think that's the most likely deal. Why? Several reasons. First, it works under the CBA without the Cavs giving up there only big guy. Second, Waiters fills more of a need on the Cavs than Bennett does because Bennett plays the positions that will be occupied by Love and LeBron while the Cavs don't even have a sure starter at SG ahead if Waiters. Finally, the Cavs are clearly in a win-now mode. Waiters played substantial minutes last season and put up good numbers. In contrast, Bennett was absolutely horrible last season and has yet to show he is an NBA player.
That does make things easier Lip. Bennett scares me for two reasons. He was really bad last season, and I have always looked at him as a tweener, and those guys usually succeed due to there aggressive nature, which I don't see in Bennett. I think Waiters would have more value if we wanted to move him for something else.
SJM -- I would prefer Waiters over Bennett from the Wolves perspective. But I think a Bennett/Thompson/Wiggins deal is more realistic for the reasons given in my last post. However, I have a more positive take than you on Bennett. He has long arms and is actually very athletic. Look back at his college stats along with reviews and video highlights from college. Some impressive stuff. Foe example, he hit 37% of his threes as a college Freshman.
As for last season, I think he was overwhelmed by the NBA. It didn't help that he was playing on a bad and poorly coached team. Add to that his breathing issues which have been corrected and I think you can perhaps throw out last season as an aberration.