A dream deal if NO continues to suck real hard.

[Triumph36]

So why do you think LeBron worked so hard with J.J in the off-season? I have a feeling it has more to do with LeBron wanting J.J to grow so he can contribute to the Cavs more so than him wanting J.J to grow so he can get traded for a guy that may or may not put us over the top.

I understand what you're saying. The thing is, LeBron has been in the league 6 seasons and only has one finals appearance to show for it. In that appearance, they got embarrassed. Now he has a chance to trade a prospect that may or may not develop into something good for a player that WILL improve the team and get them closer to a ring. I'm not saying bringing in West or player x will guarantee a ring - but it moves them in the right direction and it does it in the present.

Why would LeBron want to waste precious years of his prime gambling on whether or not a prospect will pan out? He wants to win rings. Getting West puts him closer to that goal.

edit: and agreed with the bottom two points make by AK. A decent prospect isn't going to keep LeBron in Cleveland. A championship will.

 

[redscoon]

West would be a nice pick up, but not at the expense of Hickson. The last thing we need to do is get older and way less athletic in the front court.

 

[Triumph36]

nime... you're assuming that Leon Powe is going to recover this season. If he doesn't, we're relying on 3 big people to play every game or risk having to play Shaq, AV, or West 40 minutes a night for each game a player misses.

I'm not convinced that Moon should become a shooting guard on this roster. He's very big and we're going to be taken advantage of sooner or later in a matchup as the season wears on (by a Kobe, Joe Johnson, Wade, etc.). And you realize that Posey has fallen off this season, right? This isn't 2008 or even 2009. He's having the Donyell Marshall effect, unfortunately. And just because he'll take the 6-12 minutes behind LeBron isn't necessarily an excuse to have him with all the other swingmen glut (6+ guys 6'6" to 6'8")...

The main prize, David West, is a good player to have, but you can't assume he's not going to fall off at some point. He's become more regulated to being a jump shooter, but is that still a reason to go pick him up? His rebounding may go back up, but what won't go back up is his youth. Going on 30. Haven't we already tried having a jump shooter past 30 with Donyell and Z?
There comes a time when you make a good trade or you relinquish your assets to get a desired player... David West, as great of a scorer and rebounder he is, isn't considered the latter, wouldn't you agree (is he a franchise player?). Moving an expiring, a young prospect, and a potential rotation player-when-healthy for a decent support player and garbage. That's not considered a good trade in my opinion...

I know one thing for certain... even if that avenue was available, we both know that Ferry won't make that deal because it's not in favor of us. The intention is good, but I'm not convinced David West is the clear surefire for the "best starting lineup ever". That's reserved for getting a Chris Bosh talent, not someone who's fed off another player's attention (see: Ilgauskas, Zydrunas for 14 points per game with LeBron from 2003-2009)...

Besides, if David West was talented enough to get fed from LeBron's attention, clearly J.J. can do the same thing, right? Neither aren't high level defenders either...

Missed this post earlier, you bring up some good points. First of all, David West is more than a "decent" support player. I know he's not a superstar, but he'd still be a good option to have for the next couple years. In addition, at this time next year, IF LeBron resigns - who is the second option? If you're going to say Mo, then who is the third option? We don't have one.

Furthermore, you bring up West's age. Yes, he'll turn 30 at the start of next season. But the thing is, if he does begin to fall off, we can trade him! I highly doubt he'll have major regressions between now and the end of next season. Going into the 11/12 season, if he picks up his player option his contract is only worth 7.5M, which could be swung as an expiring if he is declining badly. Basically what I'm saying is - David West could come in as a solid second or third option and he's on a relatively cheap (declining) contract that ends at the end of next season if he does not pick up his player option/the season after if he does. Trading an expiring that we might be able to get back via buyout, a DECENT prospect, and a mentally unstable player for what I described above does not seem like a bad deal.

Onto the other paragraph, no that's really not what you trade for a Chris Bosh type talent. Chris Bosh is a 25 year old that hasn't had any major nagging injuries. You don't trade a decent prospect for that. You trade a somewhat ESTABLISHED prospect for that. If Bosh became available, you really don't think a team like Miami would come up and offer Beasley, or OKC would offer Green? Those offers would blow ours out of the water.

 

[Zog]

While I'm not against West, I don't want to give up Hickson to get him. So what if Hickson is force-fed the ball? At least he is talented enough offensively that he can score in bunches if the opposing team doesn't respect him, unlike AV.

 

[rabman_gold]

Missed this post earlier, you bring up some good points. First of all, David West is more than a "decent" support player. I know he's not a superstar, but he'd still be a good option to have for the next couple years. In addition, at this time next year, IF LeBron resigns - who is the second option? If you're going to say Mo, then who is the third option? We don't have one.

Furthermore, you bring up West's age. Yes, he'll turn 30 at the start of next season. But the thing is, if he does begin to fall off, we can trade him! I highly doubt he'll have major regressions between now and the end of next season. Going into the 11/12 season, if he picks up his player option his contract is only worth 7.5M, which could be swung as an expiring if he is declining badly. Basically what I'm saying is - David West could come in as a solid second or third option and he's on a relatively cheap (declining) contract that ends at the end of next season if he does not pick up his player option/the season after if he does. Trading an expiring that we might be able to get back via buyout, a DECENT prospect, and a mentally unstable player for what I described above does not seem like a bad deal.

Onto the other paragraph, no that's really not what you trade for a Chris Bosh type talent. Chris Bosh is a 25 year old that hasn't had any major nagging injuries. You don't trade a decent prospect for that. You trade a somewhat ESTABLISHED prospect for that. If Bosh became available, you really don't think a team like Miami would come up and offer Beasley, or OKC would offer Green? Those offers would blow ours out of the water.

You have good points. David may eventually not even matter because he becomes his own expiring deal. And he's a decent player that becomes a legitimate 2nd or 3rd option. I just hope he didn't fall off this year and goes back to being a 20-8 guy if that's the case.

Still... stats are a dangerous thing to follow when assessing a player. I think David is good enough as a player that he isn't just a hollow player. So the Zach Randolph feelings I have won't cause me a problem.

On the other hand... why are you assuming Z would get a buyout? That should not ever be the usual, rather the exception to the rules of expiring contracts of players we want back. As for the decent prospect, what happens if he actually turns into just as good of a player? I won't make that deal until we know for sure what the decent prospect will do after extended burn for 2 months. The mentally unstable person may be just that... but that's ignoring the problem that will result from moving him for a star and garbage. If we were to get a point guard instead, THEN I would consider moving West, but we should not simply remove West until we can have some backup plan for an average (at the minimum) point guard type player. It's necessary due to the makeup of the team. And Posey and Wright do shit in that regard... In fact, they really bring the quality of the deal down, period.

Still, don't assume what the market has available to us. Perhaps Chris Bosh would literally not be someone who we could get as easily as the Heat or the Thunder, but that's why they're called home run deals. We aren't the leading team with our pieces for trade, but we aren't dead last like we were back in 2008. Expirings and prospects are more in stock this time around. And wasting them on David West may have a purpose, but only if you're not getting pure garbage as well.

Know the market. Know what makes a good deal. That's what I suggest for anyone who wants to play general manager. Ferry still won't do that deal regardless. You should go back in the past for reference while judging how he makes his deals.

But I know that something might eventually be open in the market. If that's New Orleans, we'll see.

 

[Mr2400]

While I'm not against West, I don't want to give up Hickson to get him. So what if Hickson is force-fed the ball? At least he is talented enough offensively that he can score in bunches if the opposing team doesn't respect him, unlike AV.

David West can score in bunches whether or not the defense respects him.

 

[Triumph36]

You have good points. David may eventually not even matter because he becomes his own expiring deal. And he's a decent player that becomes a legitimate 2nd or 3rd option. I just hope he didn't fall off this year and goes back to being a 20-8 guy if that's the case.

Still... stats are a dangerous thing to follow when assessing a player. I think David is good enough as a player that he isn't just a hollow player. So the Zach Randolph feelings I have won't cause me a problem.

On the other hand... why are you assuming Z would get a buyout? That should not ever be the usual, rather the exception to the rules of expiring contracts of players we want back. As for the decent prospect, what happens if he actually turns into just as good of a player? I won't make that deal until we know for sure what the decent prospect will do after extended burn for 2 months. The mentally unstable person may be just that... but that's ignoring the problem that will result from moving him for a star and garbage. If we were to get a point guard instead, THEN I would consider moving West, but we should not simply remove West until we can have some backup plan for an average (at the minimum) point guard type player. It's necessary due to the makeup of the team. And Posey and Wright do shit in that regard... In fact, they really bring the quality of the deal down, period.

Still, don't assume what the market has available to us. Perhaps Chris Bosh would literally not be someone who we could get as easily as the Heat or the Thunder, but that's why they're called home run deals. We aren't the leading team with our pieces for trade, but we aren't dead last like we were back in 2008. Expirings and prospects are more in stock this time around. And wasting them on David West may have a purpose, but only if you're not getting pure garbage as well.

Know the market. Know what makes a good deal. That's what I suggest for anyone who wants to play general manager. Ferry still won't do that deal regardless. You should go back in the past for reference while judging how he makes his deals.

But I know that something might eventually be open in the market. If that's New Orleans, we'll see.

I wasn't saying we'd definitely get Z back via buyout, just that it'd be a possibility. It's not like he'd help them go deep into the playoffs or anything, so I think a buyout could happen. Yeah, JJ could turn into a player as good (or better) than David West. Or he might not. Passing on deals because a prospect could become better than the player you're trading for is a bit too risky and would make us lose out on a lot of deals imo. JJ has looked good for a couple games, but that's it. We can't judge his skill level off a couple games when he had been fairly unimpressive in all the games before then. Obviously seeing him play for the next couple months will help when making the distinction between his potential and what West would bring here, which is why moving him today probably wouldn't be a great decision (and I doubt West is already available -- that'd come after we see more of JJ and can better assess his talent).

We'd be getting "pure garbage" in return because of how good West is and how affordable his contract is. If we were trading for a guy with a bad contract, like Okafor or SJax, we wouldn't have to take on excess salary because their contracts alone are bad enough. David West's deal isn't.

I think it's wrong to bring up Ferry's past deals and use them as some sort of indication of the deals he'll be looking for this year. I know I mentioned it before, but I wanted to reiterate what flamez said yesterday -- we should not expect to get quality players for absolute garbage in EVERY deal we make. If Ferry made those cheap deals in the past (Mo, Shaq) to set a precedent for future deals, he's probably going to miss out on a lot of deals because every GM is not going to be lowballed as badly as MIL/PHX.

 

[Creamy]

This years Hickson > This years West

 

[Triumph36]

This years Hickson > This years West

Let's see how they stack up come January.

 

[rabman_gold]

I wasn't saying we'd definitely get Z back via buyout, just that it'd be a possibility. It's not like he'd help them go deep into the playoffs or anything, so I think a buyout could happen. Yeah, JJ could turn into a player as good (or better) than David West. Or he might not. Passing on deals because a prospect could become better than the player you're trading for is a bit too risky and would make us lose out on a lot of deals imo. JJ has looked good for a couple games, but that's it. We can't judge his skill level off a couple games when he had been fairly unimpressive in all the games before then. Obviously seeing him play for the next couple months will help when making the distinction between his potential and what West would bring here, which is why moving him today probably wouldn't be a great decision (and I doubt West is already available -- that'd come after we see more of JJ and can better assess his talent).

We'd be getting "pure garbage" in return because of how good West is and how affordable his contract is. If we were trading for a guy with a bad contract, like Okafor or SJax, we wouldn't have to take on excess salary because their contracts alone are bad enough. David West's deal isn't.

I think it's wrong to bring up Ferry's past deals and use them as some sort of indication of the deals he'll be looking for this year. I know I mentioned it before, but I wanted to reiterate what flamez said yesterday -- we should not expect to get quality players for absolute garbage in EVERY deal we make. If Ferry made those cheap deals in the past (Mo, Shaq) to set a precedent for future deals, he's probably going to miss out on a lot of deals because every GM is not going to be lowballed as badly as MIL/PHX.

No, Danny won't be able to get in on every deal. The fact that the Warriors didn't give us S-Jax is proof of this. But in a bad economy, you'll expect more teams to be desperate not to lose as much money. There will be plenty of deals available for a good price. This type of trade isn't a good deal, at least not right now, which was the point I was trying to make.

I'm still standing by my feelings though. It really is pure garbage that's packaged with West. Z isn't even garbage at this point. J.J. isn't garbage at the moment. And West, though not mentally healthy, is also not garbage.

Either way, I give you points because you make good points. We shouldn't make moves based on potential. But with the people we're already moving just to get West in the deal nime proposed, it's not necessary now. And it may change in the future if New Orleans loses more money.

David West isn't the beginning and the end of it all. He's a good player, but not the deal you throw the bus at. That's what we'd be doing by giving up 3 players the Cavs need in their rotation.

We don't need to lowball anyone. They'll end up doing it anyway if a really good player becomes available. Read the market. It's clear we can do much better than David/Posey/Wright for Z/Delonte/J.J. If you don't believe me, you'll find out anyways. We're not trading 3 rotation guys for 1 (that's the case for this team).

And now, I'm finished talking about this until something is said in New Orleans that's different...

*switching to wait and see mode (because it's not said enough to the impatient people here)*

 

[tedginnjr]

Thought it should be said that David West was mentioned as a possibility in Windy's podcast today.

 

[Chris]

If Hickson keeps this up, not much reason to get West assuming it'd take Hickson to get him.

 

[The George]

I love JJ but if we can pick up David West without giving up JJ (which at this point I dont think we would have to) I think you have to look into the idea

think about a big man rotation like this:

David West - JJ Hickson - Leon Powe
Shaq O'Neal - Anderson Varejao - (possibly Z after a buyout)

talk about an athletic punch off the bench with JJ and AV...

Im not a huge David West guy but for pennies on the dollar (i.e an expiring contract) the dude can ball and that mid range game would fit in nicely next to shaq and LeBron...plus NO as well documented is bleeding cash so you never know

 

[Creamy]

I think cavs could get West for Z... If they take Posey with West..

Wouldn't mind that trade, even tho i'd rather get a younger center for Z if Shaq is done after this season. But then again I'm sure Ferry could work out a S&T with Shaq after the season to get us a center... Can't wait to see what players at SG, PF and C are out there at the deadline.

 

[kovanovich]

We'd be getting "pure garbage" in return because of how good West is and how affordable his contract is. If we were trading for a guy with a bad contract, like Okafor or SJax, we wouldn't have to take on excess salary because their contracts alone are bad enough. David West's deal isn't.

I think it's wrong to bring up Ferry's past deals and use them as some sort of indication of the deals he'll be looking for this year. I know I mentioned it before, but I wanted to reiterate what flamez said yesterday -- we should not expect to get quality players for absolute garbage in EVERY deal we make. If Ferry made those cheap deals in the past (Mo, Shaq) to set a precedent for future deals, he's probably going to miss out on a lot of deals because every GM is not going to be lowballed as badly as MIL/PHX.

Windy mentioned in his Wednesday (Nov. 18) podcast that Ferry has a bit of a reputation around the league for not wanting to do a deal unless he is clearly getting the better of it. His insistence to do a trade only when it's the one that he wants to do is a strength, but of course it can also be a weakness if it means you don't do a deal that would help your team. I also posted an article from a SF Bay area paper in the thread titled "Cavs weren't that interested in Jackson" that both indicates the Cavs were very interested in Jackson and that Ferry again was asking for too much (reportedly wanted Jackson plus a first rounder for West and Wally). Another instance of Ferry getting a bit greedy. Maybe justified, maybe not.

The thing about trying to predict what players might become available and what trades may happen is that there are 29 other teams out there, and as rational as we may think that we are, we really can't predict what each of them is thinking. And you can't expect to be able to make the trade that you want to make for the player that you want. In the S-Jax situation, Ferry drove a hard bargain and eventually Charlotte emerged as a possible trade partner and snatched him away. Some might not understand why Charlotte would want S-Jax and his contract, but on a certain level it makes sense -- they desperately need more scoring, for one thing.

If and when David West becomes available (and I think it's a distinct possibility that he will), the Cavs may seem to be frontrunners, but unforeseen things will surely happen (players will get injured, some teams will surprise and perhaps be in the market for a vet PF, etc.) between now and then. We were lead to believe last year before the trade deadline that, due to the economy, a number of major players would be moved, but it turned out that there wasn't a lot of activity. Brad Miller and John Salmans going to Chicago was pretty much the biggest trade, and the Bulls were only a .500 team, not a serious contender.

So I think there is a certain amount of risk expecting better players and/or better trades being available closer to the trade deadline when there will be more buyers and more competition.