Links to the Present: June 4, 2012
2012-06-04
“This will put me in the minority, I think, but I believe Lamb would be a fine selection at 4. It is easy to forget how good Richard Hamilton was, but Lamb really has his potential, with the frame to support more muscle than Rip ever did. He shoots midrange lights out, is a fine long distance shooter, can create a bit of his own offense but uses off-ball screens better than most his age. Without Lamb, there is absolutely no way UCONN would have won a national championship in 2011. He was able to feed off a shoot first point guard and get his own opportunities and make the most of them. I believe with Kyrie Irving, its a perfect fit.” [David Zavac]
“The Suns could present Gee, a restricted free agent, with $16 million over four years in hopes the Cavaliers won’t match the offer, according to The Morning Journal of Northern Ohio. Michael Kidd-Gilchrist being available at No. 4 in the NBA Draft is one scenario under which the Cavs could let Gee go.” [Sporting News]
“As the draft rumors keep picking up steam, word is the Cleveland brass are leaving no stones unturned when it comes to upgrading the roster. The Cavaliers have been linked in a trade with Charlotte, which would have them move up to No.2 overall in exchange for the No.2 and No.24 (via Los Angeles Lakers) overall picks. In addition to that scenario, it appears the Cavs are also kicking the tires on a deal with the Portland Trail Blazers, with Cleveland receiving the No.6 and No.11 selections for the 4th and 24th picks.” [Neal Leitereg]
“It might be possible for the Cavs to move up a spot, maybe even two, to get their hands on Kentucky small forward Michael Kidd-Gilchrist (6-foot-7, 232 pounds) or Florida shooting guard Bradley Beal (6-3, 207). The price, however, might be prohibitive. It might take their No. 4 pick, maybe one of the second-rounders and forward/center Anderson Varejao to accomplish it. The Cavs’ No. 24 overall pick could also be in play. That’s totally absurd and a steep price to pay. This team is void of NBA talent. Why are people so apt to just give away their second-best player, and perhaps several viable draft picks, for something that’s not a sure thing?” [Bob Finnan]
So, a few thoughts:
–You tell me on Lamb. I’m not a fan, but I find that’s not based on much other than my own intuition from having watched him play about ten games over the course of his freshman and sophomore years. Obviously draft positions will change as players go through workouts and interviews, but four seems high, no? Could the Cavs move down, pick up another pick, and still get Lamb at seven or nine?
–I’d like to emphasize that the Suns haven’t offered Alonzo Gee anything yet; what the Sporting News is reporting is just what’s in the ether. But if they did offer him four years/$16 mil… oof. That’s rich for a pretty good defensive player with a limited offensive game. (By the way, of course the Suns would offer Gee about four million dollars more than he’s worth. Is their goal to ultimately create a superteam of overpaid sixth men?)
–You know where I stand on trading up. I’m cool with that Blazers trade (which may or may not be a real thing) if the Cavs don’t love anyone at four or think they can get still someone they love at six.
Personally, I like Lamb or Barnes at 4. Both have more NBA ready bodies and NBA games. I don’t think Lamb has much in the way of shortcomings – he’s got great length, has performed on the big stage, and was a great set shooter, off the dribble, and had the ball handling chops. Barnes reminds me of Danny Granger – except I think in the NBA game, with less zones, better spacing, his shooting stroke will be much more valuable and he’ll have an easier time getting to the basket. While I really like what MKG brings to the… Read more »
I have actually heard that Portland really wants beal which make more sense then Drummond and might trade up to get him
I pray that Portland is dumb enough to do that trade. After Davis this draft is chalk full with second tier players, so the 4 spot is not all that valuable. Moving are #24 up to #11 would net us a lot of value, however, as there will still be some good players left there. If we don’t have the guy we want at 11 we could always trade down for extra draft picks.
I think Lamb would be a great pick, but I think he would still be there at #6.
I told ya why Port supposedly wants to move up and I read it on some national site. But it is only a rumor, obviously.
@hot sauce
Well put though Chad Ford seems to be on Team MKG’s payroll the way he is pimping him every second…
Is there any basis for this Portland pick swap other than heaps of commenters on various Cavs’ blogs think it’s a good idea? I’ve heard it a lot but have not read anyone from a big media outlet talk about it, and no unnamed sources cited. If it’s there and I’ve missed it, I’d love to read it if anyone could provide the links. From my perspective, I don’t see the difference in the 6 and the 4 pick, so I don’t really see the value in this deal for Portland. For the same reason, I definitely see the value… Read more »
Spots – You must have stumbled into the wrong blog. At this blog, it is a widely held belief that MKG and Beal are flawless, and that if the Cavs end up with any other wing player it will be an epic tragedy/disaster. Presenting actual analysis that runs counter to this deeply held belief may get you removed from the comment section.
(I kid…. sort of)
If that’s the case, then I feel really bad for Andre Drummond’s knees :(
Rumor has it Port wants Drummond thus the thought that the Cavs might be a good trading partner sitting at #4…
Really, NUPE? Seems to me there is no consensus after Davis. Who are your top 3 that are so much better than everybody else?
I see a draft night decision/trade happening. IF MKG and Beal are taken, then we’ll look at moving down. Or, pick a player and trade them later. IF fore some reason we aren’t happy with the 4th pick, hopefully Portland is. It’s funny as ‘deep’ as this draft is, seems like a pretty significant drop in perceived talent between 1 and 2/3 and then 4-10 or so.
If the Cavs don’t have a player they like at 4, then I agree, the trade with Portland seems like a solid move. I would not trade up if it cost anything more than swapping lottery picks and giving up the 24th pick. Personally, I think there’s a good chance Beal or MKG will be there at 4. Assuming those are the 2 guys after Davis the Cavs really want to get, then I’d sit pat at 4. Now, if Portland starting talking Matthews in a more elaborate trade scenario, I’d consider trading even if Beal or MKG were there.… Read more »
I see very few scenarios where MKG develops into a superstar. VERY few. I think Lamb is a far better fit at SG next to Irving than Beal is. He’s bigger, has freakish wingspan which means he’s far less of a liability on defense than Beal would be and he has better shooting numbers than Beal and is at least as athletic. Great fit for the Cavs. And he won a title.
Why not trade up? If we’re gonna build through the draft, we need to be #1-pick-in-the-lottery-bad for at least one more year. If MKG is a superstar, trade whatever it takes to get him. Then we’ll get our big man to go along with him next season.
I think most people might be apprehensive to pick Lamb at #4 just because nobody has been talking much about the possibility. It’s really not a bad pick. There are enough people out there who think Lamb is a better prospect than Beal. I’ve been looking into it since I heard about it, and I like the thought. Here are some resources if anyone wants to see for themselves:
http://search.espn.go.com/s/overlay/videoOverlay?searchString=jeremy%20lamb&id=7992014&dims=6&start=0
http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/blog/_/name/nba_draft/id/7933246/nba-draft-making-case-jeremy-lamb-bradley-beal
– I think Lamb is the best 2 guard in this draft. I do think 4 overall is high for a draft rich in SG’s. – Would welcome a trade up if it involved our 2nd rounders as opposed to the #24. Just don’t want to get hosed into giving up what we don’t have to. There will be a good player available at #4. – Would also welcome any trade that nets us more lottery picks If that means dangling Varejao or taking on bad contracts (Biedrins, Gordon, Okafor), I think Grant will do his best to explore every… Read more »
Love the Blazer trade but I don’t think they do it. I’m not sure who they’re desperate to get at the 4 that wont be at the 6 (Maybe Drummond? Yeah, that’ll go well)
HoopsDogg’s trade honestly makes the most sense – We get a center and a shot at a guy like Lamb. I see Toronto going after a guy like Barnes before we do.
“By the way, of course the Suns would offer Gee about four million dollars more than he’s worth. Is their goal to ultimately create a superteam of overpaid sixth men?” No, 7th and 8th men… The Suns roster makes zero sense. Sign and trade Gee for Lopez? Now that’d be interesting.
As for trades. I still say 4 and 24 and maybe a future Miami #1 for Valanciunas and #8