Cavs 16-17 Super Team

[Steve_424]

If you're the Clippers and you don't make a run this year, why not flip Paul for Irving?

 

[gourimoko]

If you're the Clippers and you don't make a run this year, why not flip Paul for Irving?

It makes literally zero sense to think they wouldn't be open to such a move.

1) Irving's contract is far more favorable.
2) Irving could be a Clip for life; he's got another 10 years minimum left in the tank. Paul is on the wrong side of 30 and has no reason to stay in L.A. and every reason to play for a contender to win now.
3) Folks saying Paul is better than Irving are ignoring the fact that very soon, maybe in 1-2 years, that won't be the case any longer.

Beyond that, it ignores the obvious dynamic that if a trade were even possible, LeBron and Paul would be the ones orchestrating it, not anyone else. If Paul wants to be traded to Cleveland, and LeBron wants Irving traded for Paul, that very likely would happen and I think both teams would just accept the swap. There's no real winners and losers in such a deal; we give up our future to win now, and the Clips give up some hope of contention now, to build around a core of Blake and Irving.

I'm not advocating for such a deal; in fact, I'm against it - I don't think it's necessary or warranted for the Cavs at this point. But to suggest we couldn't trade Irving for Paul? Yeah, I don't think that's accurate. I agree with @SteelSmack , we should, in a perfect world, be getting a pick back in that trade (not that we would).

 

[MrX]

It makes literally zero sense to think they wouldn't be open to such a move.

1) Irving's contract is far more favorable.
2) Irving could be a Clip for life; he's got another 10 years minimum left in the tank. Paul is on the wrong side of 30 and has no reason to stay in L.A. and every reason to play for a contender to win now.
3) Folks saying Paul is better than Irving are ignoring the fact that very soon, maybe in 1-2 years, that won't be the case any longer.

Beyond that, it ignores the obvious dynamic that if a trade were even possible, LeBron and Paul would be the ones orchestrating it, not anyone else. If Paul wants to be traded to Cleveland, and LeBron wants Irving traded for Paul, that very likely would happen and I think both teams would just accept the swap. There's no real winners and losers in such a deal; we give up our future to win now, and the Clips give up some hope of contention now, to build around a core of Blake and Irving.

I'm not advocating for such a deal; in fact, I'm against it - I don't think it's necessary or warranted for the Cavs at this point. But to suggest we couldn't trade Irving for Paul? Yeah, I don't think that's accurate. I agree with @SteelSmack , we should, in a perfect world, be getting a pick back in that trade (not that we would).

I enjoyed reading this. I only disagree with one part and that's no winners or losers. This very well could be winner for both. I'm going to save my real debate for this off season after I see what this post season shows.

I will say this much. Your post goes without saying that Paul is an upgrade and if that makes the difference how is that not a winner?

While we wait to see if Irving can reach Paul's talents and that's a huge if. LeBron only gets older and less patient.

As for LA they aren't winning anyways. All this does is extend their time to stay competitive so how is that not a winner.

Cleveland is not the city to think there is always tomorrow. How old where you in 1964?

 

[TheBigAristotle]

This should never happen.

I would trade Kyrie for Paul right away
I don't want Melo on this team at all. Health problems, age and history of losing
Wade will stay in Miami, I don't see him playing for another team

Despite Kyrie being a top 5 guard in the league, Paul would fit much better in this team and is a pass-first point guard. Next to LeBron and Love that ball movement would be insane