The Cavs are bringing in Washington wing Terrence Ross for a private workout on Wednesday. That’s odd for a couple of reasons. One, it’s highly doubtful that Ross is seriously in the mix at No. 4. Second, there’s no way he’s on the board when the Cavs pick again at No. 24.
What’s going on? I think the Cavs are still exploring moving up in the draft. But now it sounds like they’re also seriously looking at moving down a few spots if they can pick up additional assets. I’ve been told that’s most likely in the 7-10 range, but it’s unclear what they could be getting back that would be better than just taking Kidd-Gilchrist, the small forward that currently sits at No. 2 on the Big Board behind Davis. As for Ross, the Cavs better get a pick in the Top 11 if they want him. If Tyler Zeller is off the board, I believe the Bucks are leaning toward Ross at No. 12.
(The link’s Insider only, by the way.) I don’t know how to feel about this. It completely depends on what “additional assets” means. Future first-rounders? More picks in this draft? Is it the 6/11 and 2/24 swap with the Blazers? (Probably not if they’re working out Terrence Ross.) The Cavs are active; that’s about all we know. I’ll keep you guys posted as things unfold over the next 36 hours or so.
Update: Or up? Again, Chad Ford:
With Charlotte’s no. 2 pick, I’m taking Michael Kidd-Gilchrist even though the Bobcats are probably trading this pick to Cleveland for no. 4 and no. 24. If they keep it, I think they’re taking Thomas Robinson. If the Cavs get the pick, they’re taking Bradley Beal.
I mean, this deal has been talked about for a while. And obviously, if the Cavs move up, they’re taking Beal. I’m okay with this as long as the Cavalier front office really loves Beal. If they believe in him, they should do it. (Though, y’know, tease Charlotte a bit: offer them the two second-rounders and see if you can get them to make a desperation move. I don’t know how many teams have the desire and the assets to move into the number 2 slot and offer a better deal than that.)
Personally, I would rather the Cavs stay at 4 and draft MKG. But I don’t work in a front office and don’t have a team of scouts at my disposal. Do you, Chris Grant.
Or maybe it’s just smoke and mirrors…
^I hope so. It’s so important to be in the top of the draft in the NBA. That’s common knowledge, right?
Alex Kennedy: Teams are inquiring about Anderson Varejao, but the Cleveland Cavaliers haven’t been impressed with any of the offers they’ve received (Twitter, taken from HoopsHype website)
I honestly think they are seeing where Ross falls, and if its far enough they may pull the trigger on an Andy deal Thursday. Houston currently has 3 first round picks and if they can’t work something out for Dwight, the Cavs may approach them about a pick to take Ross if he falls also. I think Ross and Lamb may be the best purely offensive player personally. For this reason I wouldn’t mind taking 6/11 to take Drummond (this is the ONLY way I take Drummond so please don’t shoot me) and then Lamb/Ross at 11.
Secondly, I gotta comment on the other recent trades. People assume since the Bobcats now have Ben Gordon they don’t want a SG (Beal). Also, the same goes for Washington not wanting a SF because they picked up Ariza (MKG, Barnes). If that’s the case I guess we should pass up on a wing because Gee, while not better right now, has the potential to be better in a few years than what Gordon and Ariza are at this point in their careers correct? Of course not. None of these players are difference makers and they would only be a role player on a good play-off team. That said, why would any GM with half a brain adjust their draft strategy based on these acquisitions? I do not personally believe the recent trades have had much effect on team’s draft boards unless two players were even and the front office needed some type of movement to break a 50-50 tie between prospects.
Donald, its not about adjusting your draft strategy based on trading for a marginal to below average starter. Its simply recognizing that its telling that a GM is working hard to upgrade at a certain position a week before the draft. It indicates, but is obviously no gaurantee, that the GM has other positions planned on draft day. Obviously if Gordon and Ariza were long term players on those teams no one would question that they might want to upgrade, but expensively upgrading a position 3 days prior to Upgrading the same position naturally through the draft makes little sense. These teams are at the top of the draft and have a good idea of who will be there, so that probably had something to do with them making these trades just days prior.
The trade isn’t the cause of the draft decision, but a symptom of it. Get it?
Colin, The thing I’m worried about though is MKG going 2 and beal 3, which is a very realistic possibility. In that case I would lean Robinson, but would be much more accepting of a trade.
Matt, First the move with Gordon netted them a future first round pick. This, much like the deal we made for B Davis, is the true grab. Therefore, this does not effect draft strategy at all except for having more picks in upcoming years. Understand?
I see your point in the Washington deal though.
I would hate to see Andy go, but it looks more and more like that is going to happen. If they can get a good enough asset for him, I guess I don’t see a problem with it. It sounds like there are going to be a lot of teams doing a lot of moving around, come draft day. Should be a good one to watch.
LETS GO CAVS!
Who knows. The draft is all over the place. If they’re not taking MKG, I’d love to see them trade down. After the top 6 or 7, I think the next 13-16 picks are great and about equal. My fear is that there’s a big dropoff right before the second Cavs pick, unless someone drops. I think the Rockets are being brilliant this year for that reason.
“People assume since the Bobcats now have Ben Gordon they don’t want a SG (Beal). Also, the same goes for Washington not wanting a SF because they picked up Ariza (MKG, Barnes).”
I don’t think there is a single person on the face of the earth who has made those assumptions.
Man, the more i read/hear about him, the more i want MKG. Maybe i’m missing something, but i’m baffled by the constant Beal?Ray Allen comparisons. Beal only shot 34% from 3-point land. In college, with a closer 3/point line. 34% isn’t terrible, but it certainly doesn’t bring Ray Allen to mind. And he averaged less then 15 ppg. I’ve been talking as much or more trash on Harrison Barnes than damn near anybody here, but i would honestly rather take Barnes than Beal. MKG, Barnes, and Beal, in that order. If they even consider drafting Drummond, i will go insane.
And if i read/hear one more person saying we should trade up from 24 to draft Sullinger, i will claw my own face off.
Cranky M. Loved what you said about Sullinger. MKG is a gym rat, and he’s a winner who will work hard every second of the season and off-season to improve his game. Beal, however, has a decent work ethic, and I think beal is going to be a much better scorer and SHOOTER than MKG. He is no ray allen though. And Beal can give us the outside shooting we needed from Casspi that never came.
And When colin says “2/24 and 6/11 trade” doesnt he mean 4/24 and 6/11? we have the 4th and 24th pick. or am i just reading that wrong?
Cleveland’s 4 and 33/34 for Houston’s 3 1st rounders. They can address a couple holes and take a shot on a player or 2 with 4 first rounders. Get 2 potential starters or at least 1 good starter, a 6th man type player and some good role players….can’t exactly be any worse than what we have now.
May be completely asinine, but it’s something to think about, i’d be fine with it, we’re gonna be top 10 again next year anyways with 2 first round picks. (Miami’s or the Laker’s, which ever one is lower from the Session’s trade….THANKS LAKERS ).
Houston would not so much as justify that trade with a moment’s thought.
Cranky M, your name is appropriate. Sullinger is going to be a very good Millsap/Love type player if he stays healthy. Its definitely an If, but certainly worth the gamble in the late teens. The guy has great range for his size, great touch, good technique, great defensive awareness (was the only 6’9+ player on one of the best defenses in the country) and rebounds very well. If he stays healthy he will make a lot of teams loof foolish for passing on him, including possibly the Cavs at #4.
Now obviously I don’t think we should consider him at 4 with his health concerns, just saying he has a small but not negligible chance to go down as one of the top 4 players in this draft if healthy.
As for Beal, He tore it up in high school from range, has perfect form, and came on at the end of the season shooting 45% for the last month. The ray allen comparison is certainly hyperbole, but he’ll probably be around 40% from three by the time he’s near his prime. Add that to a good dribble drive, solid defense, and great rebounding, and I’ll take that all day. He had slightly better stats than barnes on a less talented team as a true freshman compared to barnes being a sophomore. Barnes is destined to be a middlingly to below average efficiency volume scorer in the NBA that doesn’t have a lot of weaknesses, but doesn’t have any other strengths either. Sure, he’ll be able to get you a 40-45% look at a long two whenever he wants, but that’s about all he brings to the table that is above average, and its not a shot you want to settle for all that often.