Shumpert trade ideas

[jlegg21]

We are not trading our best wing defender who is not only having a great season, but is also on a reasonable contract and actually young.

Deandre Liggins?

 

[Jordan]

Deandre Liggins?

LeBron James? We definitely aren't trading him.

 

[jlegg21]

LeBron James? We definitely aren't trading him.

Well... sure, I'll give you that one

 

[Rich]

Yeah, the money hit IS absurd.

If Gilbert wanted to pay it, I wouldn't care at all. But we know for a FACT that we are not adding that type of salary. That's my point.

And I really don't think you can even blame Gilbert and say he's not "all-in". Our payroll is gigantic and locked in at gigantic numbers for multiple years.

We aren't always going to have LeBron. Something about LeBron is that no matter what, if you are willing to spend enough money, you can make a team with LeBron a legitimate contender. Even the Mo/Delonte/Jamison/Shaq teams could have probably won at least one title in the right year.

After LeBron, the Front Office will have to be able to reign in how they acquire and how much they pay certain players if we want to eventually contend. I'm not even saying they have to fall out of the tax, but falling out of the repeaters tax at the max level , thats not a bad goal.

If this payroll were some unprecedented thing that no one has ever paid, maybe I'd buy this.

But when you combine payroll+luxury tax...Brooklyn paid more. To flail out in the 2nd round, they paid more. I just can't condone passing up on ways to improve the team to save money after winning a title. Gilbert has been a good owner. But I don't think every move he makes is a good one. Worrying about the luxury tax now....not a good move.

 

[InBoobieWeTrust]

If this payroll were some unprecedented thing that no one has ever paid, maybe I'd buy this.

But when you combine payroll+luxury tax...Brooklyn paid more. To flail out in the 2nd round, they paid more. I just can't condone passing up on ways to improve the team to save money after winning a title. Gilbert has been a good owner. But I don't think every move he makes is a good one. Worrying about the luxury tax now....not a good move.

Prokorov is worth almost double what Gilbert is, and how many years was their payroll that high? One year? The Cavs are quickly filling up #2,3,4 etc on that list, season after season.

And even if I wanted Gilbert to pony up maximum cash for a few more years...doesn't change the fact that we know that it's not gonna happen.

 

[Efficiency]

A championship means higher ticket prices, more merchandise sold, more national TV exposure, more sponsors.

So, no I don't agree that Gilbert only sees value from a title if he sells the team. After all, why is the team more valuable just because it has a championship, if not for its ability to generate revenue?

Lebron was the one who doubled the value of the franchise.

So you expect Gilbert to severely cut into his profit now while knowing the value of his franchise will plummet when Lebron is gone? That don't make much sense. Last time Lebron left the value of the Cavs dropped 26%.

Lets be real if paying that much in luxury taxes didn't hurt more teams would be doing it.

 

[Lyuokdea]

Lebron was the one who doubled the value of the franchise.

So you expect Gilbert to severely cut into his profit now while knowing the value of his franchise will plummet when Lebron is gone? That don't make much sense. Last time Lebron left the value of the Cavs dropped 26%.

Lets be real if paying that much in luxury taxes didn't hurt more teams would be doing it.

I'm not sure if you know about how people value companies --- basically billionaires are smart enough to realize that Lebron won't be playing here in 10 years. That would get factored into the value of the Cavs franchise.

The value of the franchise went up because of branding -- LBJ leads to the high possibility of championships. Championships produce a brand for a franchise, and the franchise brand tends to stick around even after the championship team is gone. Look at the Boston Celtics or LA Lakers. They have lasting value because of a brand was established starting in the 60s and 70s. The value of the Lakers franchise didn't go down by 50% because Kobe got old and retired.

Also, for one of a kind things like "professional sports teams" just like "da Vinci paintings" or "Stradivarius violins" the forbes calculated price of the franchise doesn't really mean anything. The franchise will go for whatever a single owner wants to pay for it -- and those prices are often very very different than the proclaimed "value of the franchised". It's a silly number that is only around to sell magazines.