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).