Looks like Chris Grant must be reading the blog – Manny Harris has been resigned for a second 10 day contract. More than six seconds of playing time, we hope?
About The Site
Follow Me On Twitter
Archives
- June 2013
- May 2013
- April 2013
- March 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- August 2012
- July 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
Categories
- 10 Things to Like
- 2010 Playoffs
- 5 on 5
- Actual Trade/Signing
- and Outliers
- Announcements
- Book Reviews
- Cameron's Corner
- Cavs: the Duels
- Colin Explains His Feelings with a Poem
- Conversations
- Draft Profiles
- Explicating the CBA
- Interviews
- Kevin's Summer Project
- Links To The Present
- Mailbag Time!
- Manifestos
- Multimedia
- Off-Season Moves
- Opinion
- Player Grades
- Podcasts
- Power Rankings of No Consequence To Anybody
- Previews
- Ranks
- Recaps
- Rookie Roundup
- Rumor!
- Ryan Hollins Fan Fiction
- Silly Posts To Help Us Cope
- The Coaching Situation
- The LeBron Situation
- Trends
- Uncategorized
The Lineup
Colin McGowan is the editor in chief of Cavs: The Blog. He has written for Deadspin, Sports on Earth, and The Classical. You can contact him at colinsilasmcgowan@gmail.com or on Twitter @cs_mcgowan.
Kevin Hetrick is a contributing editor at Cavs: the Blog. He is a civil engineer who grew up in Northeast Ohio as a fan of the Cavs, Indians, and Browns. He now lives in Indianapolis. His email is hetrick46@gmail.com, and he's on Twitter at @hetrick46.
Tom Pestak is a staff writer at Cavs: the Blog. He's from the west side of Cleveland and lives and (mostly) dies by the success and (mostly) failures of his beloved teams. You can watch his fanaticism during Cavs games @tompestak.
Nate Smith is a staff writer at C:TB who grew up in Anchorage, Alaska, and moved to NE Ohio in 2000. He adopted the Cavs in 2003 and graduated from Kent State in 2009 with a BA in English. He can be contacted at oldseaminer@gmail.com or @oldseaminer on twitter.
Robert Attenweiler is a staff writer at Cavs: The Blog. Originally from OH, he's long made his home in NYC where he writes plays and screenplays (www.disgracedproductions.com) some of which end up being about Ohio, basketball or both. He has also written for The Classical and the blog Raising the Cadavalier. You can contact him at rattenweiler@gmail.com or @cadavalier.
Mallory Factor is the voice behind Cavs: The Podcast. By day Mallory works in fundraising and by night he runs a music business company. To see his music endeavors check out www.fivetracks.com. Hit him up at Malloryfactorii@gmail.com or @Malfii.
John Krolik is the editor emeritus of Cavs: The Blog. At present, he is pursuing a law degree at Tulane University. You can contact him at johnkrolik@gmail.com or @johnkrolik.
Cavalier Blogs and News
Favorites From Around The League
Follow Me On Twitter
General NBA
Other Places To Find My Work
-
The Comment Monster
A monster lives in the comments section of Cavs: The Blog, and he likes to feed on comments. We have very little idea about when he will strike. What we do know is that comments with 2 or more links will get filed into the spam folder, as will comments with foul or discriminatory language. The comment monster also seems to enjoy extra-long comments, so if you have a long comment, you may want to press copy before submitting a long comment and break it into multiple pieces if the monster eats it. If you are having particular trouble with the monster, email one of us and we will talk to him for you.
Meaning a Sessions trade is imminent, IMO.
Good, please include him in a three-team trade involving the Rockets and Lakers that nets us KMart, Budinger, or Parsons.
Chase Budinger? Never considered that. It would be a nice pick up. I think I’d prefer him over Martin due to age.
So…
Cavs get Budinger
Lakers get Sessions, Scola
Rockets get Gasol
Something like that? Not sure if this works for salaries….
I think the Rockets would have to get rid of more money -
It would go something like this – http://games.espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=6mwch9w
Which I doubt the Rockets would do.
This probably has more potential, but I think we’d need a draft pick from one of these two teams, which I don’t think they’d give up…
http://games.espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=7s5xfqh
I posted this under another article, but I’ll re-post here for ease of reference:
Here’s how we could get Martin:
Cavs get:
Kevin Martin
Luis Scola
Darius Morris
Lakers get:
Antawn Jamison
Ramon Sessions
Chase Budinger
Cavs 2013 First Round Pick from MIA
Rockets get:
Pau Gasol
Omri Casspi
The baseline for this trade was the offer the Rockets made to acquire Gasol in the deal involving Chris Paul that the league office vetoed.
Here’s how we get Parsons and Martin:
Cavs get:
Kevin Martin
Luis Scola
Chandler Parsons (or Chase Budinger)
Lakers get:
Antawn Jamison
Ramon Sessions
Omri Casspi
Cavs 2013 First Round Pick from MIA
Rockets get:
Pau Gasol
Daniel Gibson
Cavs Protected Pick from SAC
Obviously, you can redistribute picks as necessary. All of the salaries match in the deals proposed above.
Honestly, James, I think both those trades are unlikely simply because they involve massive reshuffling. I also doubt the Cavs would take on Scola, who is signed for 4 years.
Mallory,
I agree re: scenario 1. The Cavs would be hesitant to take on Scola if it meant only getting Martin. However, I think Grant would do it to get an above-average scorer at the 2 (who is also an Ohio native) and a great prospect like Budinger or Parsons. As for the reshuffling, the Cavs shouldn’t care because we are obviously not going to the playoffs this season and Jamison and Sessions are gone this offseason. Houston is desperate to get Gasol and sees only two starters change, one of whom is replaced with the “star” player they covet. Finally, the Lakers get the point guard they need, a great short-term at the four who would pair nicely with Bynum, a role-player in Casspi and an asset for the future (the pick). Not to mention the Lakers get to clear $19 M in salary next year (Jamison and Sessions).
I honestly believe this is a realistic proposal.
If you look above, you can see the trades I think would happen – they’re slightly less money shifted, and actually have nice outcomes for all teams involved.
If you want Martin, check out… http://games.espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=78n4nq7
I just don’t see too many more bodies moving. Jamison probably wont be included in this trade unless it’s something like this, with us getting a first round pick too. http://games.espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=7y4kz4c
I just don’t see those guys as having a ton of value, particularly to the Lakers who would probably rather get Scola from the deal than Jamison anyway.
James – you really think the Lakers WANT expiring contracts? They’re not in the business to worry about money, and taking on an old guy who is about to leave makes no sense to them – my guess is, in the name of having value later on, they want larger not smaller contracts, especially given that trade exception. When Jamison’s contract expires at the end of the year, they lose a HUGE piece of value. Expiring contracts are how teams like the lakers upgrade. I just don’t see them doing this unless they turn around and trade Jamison, Bynum, and some other assets to Orlando for Howard, which, honestly could happen but is the only scenario in which I see them taking on Jamison’s contract.
I don’t agree about the Lakers preferring Scola. His contract is terrible for a 31 year old PF and with Jamison they save a ton of luxury tax money next year. Plus, I think he fits better in the Lakers front court and has already played under Mike Brown so he will be familiar with the system.
I like the first trade, but I doubt the Lakers would pull the trigger unless they have really soured on Gasol. Scola, Sessions, and Harangody would be a really bad haul. I think we would have to throw in a first round pick.
I agree about the first round pick – probably a late one that we have. But otherwise it’s actually a nice trade. But it’s so tough to tell because we have no idea how interested the lakers are in making that many moves. Something tells me Gasol isn’t going.
(I may end up eating those words, but it’s just a gut feeling right now. They’re not going to get anything close to his value. He could move if they get Howard, though.)
Honestly, I originally tried to construct a four-team trade incorporating Orlando in the trade machine but it wouldn’t let me because I had too many players. Jamison’s contract would be a tremendous asset for the Magic and would allow the Lakers to easily take on Turkoglu’s horrendous contract that Orlando would want to include in the Howard trade. Plus, in my scenario above, they would have an extra first rounder to throw at Orlando.
Clearly, none of these trades are going to happen. Just fun to think about.
These trades are all horrible. There is zero point in going for a player like Kevin Martin. All flash, not a very productive player shooting at 41 %, under 3 assists, and under 3 rebounds per game. I don’t want the Cavs giving up anyone productive for a 30 year old SG like Martin.
Martin just turned 29 last month. More importantly, he can create his own shot, which, in giving up Jamison, we’re losing. His PER is above average, and he’s a good defender. He’s also pretty long for his position.
Basically, he’s the kind of vet we’re going to have to get to move forward as a team. He’s not my favorite, but I think he’d be a good get.
I know I sound like a broken record, but my ultimate goal for the team would be a championship, not reaching the playoffs as soon as possible. To me this means that when we are young and not contenders, like we are now, we get as many possible assets as possible that will be likely to be productive when we could be contenders (i.e. draft picks and cap flexibility and young guys) Then when you have a solid young core in place that has proven capable of competing, you fill out the roster with vets like Martin or whatever position/roles you still need in free agency. You don’t give away draft picks just to jump the Free Agency gun for players whose contracts are up in a year (martin) and could easily leave you empty handed, or guys who will be well past their primes when you have a title shot.
@KyrieShow
First, Kevin Martin is an above-average shooter. His adjusted field goal percentage is better than many other players at his position, including, but not limited to, Afflalo, Thornton, Mayo, Joe Johnson, and even Kobe Bryant.
Moreover, as Mallory pointed out, he can create his own shot, which is something that no player on the Cavs’ current roster other than Irving and Jamison can do.
Second, not only did he just turn 29, as Mallory said, he is only under contract for two more years. The Cavs would be able to re-evaluate him after his 30th birthday. A huge advantage.
Finally, KMart has presented no character issues during his career, which is important for a young, developing team. In fact, he has stayed focused and productive on a potential playoff team despite being openly shopped before the season,. Other, lesser players would have caused a distraction (see Lamar Odom).
In other words, he is exactly the kind of player the Cavs should target.
James,
The fact that we can let him walk (a.k.a he has the option to walk) in 1.5 years isn’t really an argument FOR giving up 2 first round draft picks and assets that can probably net another first round pick. (jameson, sessions).
Also, no way the Lakers view Jameson as an asset if they can’t immediately flip him. He’s not good, He lowers their ability to go over the tax (i.e. have excess talent and compete during kobes last great years) because when he comes off the books, they’ll still be over the tax, and thus still only have an MLE to work with. The lakers aren’t as concerned as most teams with the tax.
Matt is right about the Jamison scenario (as I said)
Matt -
The key word is that we CAN let him walk. I don’t think the Cavs would want to, but that is an option if you are concerned that he won’t be playing at a high level after turning 30. Personally, I am not concerned about a drop off and think he has at least four more productive seasons in him. Plus, he is the kind of player that the Cavs actually have a chance at signing/re-signing in the current NBA climate.
Jamison is not getting us a first round pick for the reasons you listed above and Sessions would net us a bottom-five pick at best. I would much prefer known quantities to late-first round picks any day of the week.
I concede that the Lakers may not be interested in Jamison unless they could flip him. However, as I stated, I think he could be a valuable piece in a deal with Orlando because it allows the Lakers to take on so much bad salary without giving anything up.
Matt – You are right in that you want your star players to be at their prime when you’re a contender. That being said, a guy who can create shots and hit them (like Kevin Martin) is probably not going to lose THAT much ability until he’s at least around 34. Look at the Mavs last year – Jason Terry filled that role and it worked.
The Cavs aren’t more than 2 or so years away from being a serious contender. If they are, I don’t think we’ll be able to keep Kyrie. Sadly, the clock is ticking already.
For example:
Lakers could take back Reddick and Turkoglu for Jamison’s expiring and Barnes’ expiring. Orlando would get Bynum, picks and would be under the cap for 2012-13.
@Mallory
I don’t think there is any risk of losing Kyrie if we aren’t contending in two years given the new CBA. Especially if he qualifies for the Derrick Rose Rule, which would allow us to give him significantly more money than any other team. No way a young player walks away from 5 years/$90 million.
That may be so, and he may fit well in Cleveland for all of those reasons. But why are we trying to be contenders right away? Stacking up picks seems more important than getting pieces that make the Cavs instantly better.
Ramon Sessions to LA for Steve Blake and a 20-25 first round pick seems like the safest trade in this situation… 2 more first rounders for next years team sounds better than K Mart to me.
There is a slim chance that we would find a player at the end of the first who can contribute as much as KMart.
For example, here are the last ten players taken in the 2008-2010 drafts:
2010 = James Anderson, Craig Brackins, Elliot Williams, Trevor Booker, Damion James, Dominique Jones, Quincy Pondexter, Jordan Crawford, Greivis Vasquez, Daniel Orton, and Lazar Hayward
2009 = Eric Maynor, Darren Collison, Victor Claver, Omri Casspi, Byron Mullens, Rodrigue Beaubois, Taj Gibson, DeMarre Carroll, Wayne Ellington, Toney Douglas, and Christian Eyenga
2008 = Alexis Ajinca, Ryan Anderson, Courtney Lee, Kosta Koufos, Serge Ibaka, Nicolas Batum, George Hill, Darrell Arthur, Donte Greene, D.J. White, and J.R. Giddens.
I don’t know about you, but I’d rather have KMart over anybody on that list with the possible exceptions of Ryan Anderson and Nicolas Batum.
And, yes, I am aware that Martin was taken with the 26th pick in the 2004 draft.
@James
I think Chase Budinger was taken in the 2nd round of 2010. Still, I agree, the known is better than the unknown.
As far as Jamison, he does seem like a difficult player to move, unless the Cavs are willing to some really bad contracts. I know the Wizards would love to dump Blatche. Probably Lewis too.
Of course, I hate the thought of the Cavs taking either of them, unless Washington was to throw in a 1st. Which is also doubtful.
Scuzz, thanks for the support on my central point.
I think many people on this site exaggerate the value of late first round picks. The NBA draft is not like the NFL draft: it is extremely difficult to find a quality starter at the end of the first round. This difficulty is precisely why teams are willing to sell these picks for cash on draft night (the Cavs were even rumored to be interested in purchasing one of these picks last year).
I think we need to get something for Sessions, but I would vastly prefer to get a known quantity because there is a lot less risk.
James -
I’ve been saying this for weeks, and it’s why I don’t think tanking is a good idea – drafting in the NBA is EXTREMELY hit or miss. You basically have a less than 50% of getting someone who will even end up on an NBA team. Obviously much of that comes from the second round. But even early on, it’s so hit and miss. I’d much rather get a known entity than an unknown. Sure the home run factor exists – you could end up with something amazing – but more likely than not you’re getting something mediocre.
Kevin Martin is a top 100 player. Chances of drafting that, even in the MIDDLE of the draft is low.
@Mallory
So if the Cavs end up with a top 10 pick, would you want them to trade it? Provided a good offer was made.
How good are we talking, Scuzz? The argument could be made that, unless it’s top 7 and there is someone Grant LOVED available, the pick would be worth trading. Lets say we had the number 5 pick and we got an offer for Tyreke Evans (which wont happen) would you take it? He’s obviously a near-star, but imagine someone of a slightly lower caliber. I’d definitely consider it. But I doubt most teams would do it.
I’d make that trade for Evans in a heartbeat. There are so many busts in the top ten that I would much rather have even just a slightly above-average starter than any pick outside of the top five.
Just take a look at the guys who were drafted between sixth and fifteenth from 2008-2010, in order:
2010 = Ekpe Udoh, Greg Monroe, Al-Farouq Aminu, Gordan Hayward, Paul George, Cole Aldrich, Xavier Henry, Ed Davis, Patrick Patterson, Larry Sanders, and Luke Babbitt
2009 = Johnny Flynn, Stephen Curry, Jordan Hill, DeMar DeRozan, Brandon Jennings, Terrence Williams, Gerald Henderson, Tyler Hansbrough, Earl Clark, and Austin Daye
2008 = Danilo Gallinari, Eric Gordon, Joe Alexander, D.J. Augustin, Brook Lopez, Jerryd Bayless, Jason Thompson, Brandon Rush, Anthony Randolph, and Robin Lopez
I count seven potential impact players in the group (Monroe, George, Curry, Jennings, Gallinari, Gordon, and Lopez). Seven out of thirty picks. Those kind of odds do not inspire confidence.
Finally, Mallory, just to be clear, when I refer to “people on this site” I am not limiting that comment to the authors of the blog. I am also including people who post on the message boards too.
James -
Don’t worry, I got your gist. Just glad someone else sees the lack of value in picks. The NBA has a strange obsession with picks – I think it’s because the potential to draft a game changer exists, and you need a game changer to win.
That being said, we’ve probably got our game changer, and our chances of drafting at 1-5 is insanely low. Even if we miss the playoffs, it’s almost 0 that we’re winning the lottery unless we tank bad.
That’s why I’m such a big supporter of going after a FA – at least we have a known entity. As long as it’s a smart evaluation of that player, it makes sense. Lets remember Larry Hughes was pretty inconsistent before he came to Cleveland – chances are we’re not going to run into that again.
I would even make the argument that Joe Johnson of two years ago, when he signed that huge contract, would be worth it to Cleveland. Guys like him are hard to find, and sometimes over paying makes sense if that guy has a specifically great trait, and you can fill your roster with inexpensive, smart signings.
Agree with Matt and TheKyrieShow. Adding veteran past-their-prime contributors for picks to our non-contending team limits our flexibility to make moves later when our best young now players are peaking. Why would we strap ourselves later just to be as good as possible RIGHT NOW? Only to watch our best player walk when his contract is up because we have no ability to improve our roster and he’s sick of losing in the playoffs every year?
Hmm, haven’t we done that before?
John -
Here is my biggest question – what difference does it make WHEN we improve our roster? If we know that picks could are generally less valuable than we think they are, why does it matter whether we get a good player to accompany Kyrie now or next year?
Your logic is flawed simply because flexibility only takes you as far as the assets available. If you have the chance to add someone of impact now, you do it. The problem in the past wasn’t that we spent money we spent money, it was that we misevaluated who we spent our money on. Having a good front office is MUCH more important than drafting high.
I think that drafting big men is where the really bad inconsistencies are found especially. However I do want us to keep our draft picks. Also I want us to keep winning, while I know that won’t happen because Andy is out which should have the people wanting us to tank happy I think that we have a great coach who has these young guys playing above there head and probably has a better chance than most to take young talent to their potential.
I think that fans get off way to much on making up trades and entering them in the ESPN trade machine. None of them ever happen so why even try. Let’s just watch and enjoy.
As someone who is “exaggerating” the value of first round picks; I think if value is getting something for more than it’s worth, that late first round picks are good value.
Looking at the 2008 – 2010 21 – 30 picks, I’d say 1/3 of them are players that can be good rotation players on good teams. These players’ contracts all started at $1 million-ish. If you drafted three times and got one of the ten good players that’s good value. If you made 3 – $100 speculative bets, and lost on two but won $500 on the other, that would be a good thing, right?
As a young team that doesn’t need to win big immediately, I’d rather get “value” from Jamison and Sessions expiring contracts, even as late first round draft picks, take on a couple of contracts and save the big free agency acquisitions or trade targets for a couple of years.
Random question but are Mallory and Mallory Factor 2 the same person?
Yep yep -
I just don’t always log in. Sorry for the confusion
I am getting really frustrated hearing people say that we need to make sure we don’t compromise our cap flexibility. We will never be able to lure elite free agents to Cleveland; it will always be a second tier-destination for free agents (bad weather, has state income tax, not a legacy NBA city, etc.). So, operating under the assumption that we will not be able to sign elite free agents, cap space becomes a non-asset for two reasons. First, because of the way the CBA structured we will always be able to re-sign high performing players. Second, we are fortunate to cheer for a team with an owner who will spend an absurd amount of money for a contender, so the luxury tax isn’t a problem.
Kevin,
You are exactly right.
An additional comment. The Cavs already have 3 picks in the top 40 this year. This doesn’t even include what value they might be able to derive from Sessions and/or Jamison. They can do wonders in solidifying team depth and rotational strength assuming that Grant et al. do their job well.