Cavs Trade w/ Memphis (Speights, Selby, Ellington, and #1 pick for Leuer)

[Scholar]

Except Speights most likely will exercise his option and CJ Miles may be murdered by any number of posters on this board if his option was picked up.

Not happening. He'll easily get more then his option by opting out. There is no way his agent doesn't have him test the waters.

 

[Douglar]

The Cavs could have more cap space available if they get lower draft picks--

 $9,704,595     Anderson Varejao
 $7,070,730     Kyrie Irving
 $5,138,430     Tristan Thompson
 $4,062,000     Dion Waiters
 $3,000,000     Alonzo Gee
 $1,703,760     Tyler Zeller
 $2,462,400     Cavs 2013 Pick (est #8)
 $1,082,520     Cavs 2013 Pick (est #25)
 $1,563,120     Cavs 2014 Pick (est #17)
 $19,795,620    10 Year Max Free Agent
 $500,000       Roster hold for Spot 11
[B] $56,083,175     Total for first 11 players[/B]
 $60,044,000    Salary Cap
[B] $4,060,825      Cap Space for Spot 12[/B]

If they get the lower draft picks, they could bring in a 7 year max free agent and still have enough cap space to bring in a <7 year max free agent if they waive Gee and Varejao.

 $4,000,000     Anderson Varejao waived
 $7,070,730     Kyrie Irving
 $5,138,430     Tristan Thompson
 $4,062,000     Dion Waiters
 waived         Alonzo Gee waived
 $1,703,760     Tyler Zeller
 $2,462,400     Cavs 2013 Pick (est #8)
 $1,082,520     Cavs 2013 Pick (est #25)
 $1,563,120     Cavs 2014 Pick (est #17)
 $17,800,000    7 Year Max Free Agent
 $500,000       Roster hold for Spot 11
 $45,382,960    Total for first 11 players
 $60,044,000    Salary Cap
 $14,761,040    Cap Space for Spot 12

 

[petes999]

The Cavs could have more cap space available if they get lower draft picks--

 $9,704,595     Anderson Varejao
 $7,070,730     Kyrie Irving
 $5,138,430     Tristan Thompson
 $4,062,000     Dion Waiters
 $3,000,000     Alonzo Gee
 $1,703,760     Tyler Zeller
 $2,462,400     Cavs 2013 Pick (est #8)
 $1,082,520     Cavs 2013 Pick (est #25)
 $1,563,120     Cavs 2014 Pick (est #17)
 $19,795,620    10 Year Max Free Agent
 $500,000       Roster hold for Spot 11
[B] $56,083,175     Total for first 11 players[/B]
 $60,044,000    Salary Cap
[B] $4,060,825      Cap Space for Spot 12[/B]

If they get the lower draft picks, they could bring in a 7 year max free agent and still have enough cap space to bring in a <7 year max free agent if they waive Gee and Varejao.

 $4,000,000     Anderson Varejao waived
 $7,070,730     Kyrie Irving
 $5,138,430     Tristan Thompson
 $4,062,000     Dion Waiters
 waived         Alonzo Gee waived
 $1,703,760     Tyler Zeller
 $2,462,400     Cavs 2013 Pick (est #8)
 $1,082,520     Cavs 2013 Pick (est #25)
 $1,563,120     Cavs 2014 Pick (est #17)
 $17,800,000    7 Year Max Free Agent
 $500,000       Roster hold for Spot 11
 $45,382,960    Total for first 11 players
 $60,044,000    Salary Cap
 $14,761,040    Cap Space for Spot 12

Good analysis, but

1) I think we will draft higher than you think ... Either we get the LA pick which I believe is better than 50/50 chance and/or we use our two high seconds and move up with either LA/Miami pick like last year.

2) Who would you target with the 7-9 year free agent money to save $2 million versus 10-year guy? iguodala, Gay? Is it worth it versus Dirk, Carmelo or Lebron? You could try or Bynum or Josh Smith this year but you ar probably settling. Really our one shot to get someone to come to Cleveland is LeBron or trade or overpay.

 

[Giambiwannabe7]

Not happening. He'll easily get more then his option by opting out. There is no way his agent doesn't have him test the waters.

Typo. Which is why zi started the post with "Except Speights...". Meaning I was disagreeing with the content of the post.

 

[kovanovich]

Not happening. He'll easily get more then his option by opting out. There is no way his agent doesn't have him test the waters.

I think that's probably right, and I've been persuaded it is better to move him if possible. I like trades as much as the next guy (at least if we are dealing from a position of strength), but I don't necessarily like to see a conveyor belt of players coming and going. That said, we should be able to ship him out. If the Lakers don't want Gibson, maybe we can give them Speights for the injured Jordan Hill. Beauty is that trade actually is legal (unlike a Gibson-Hill swap). Might also be able to get a future pick (second rounder? first?? I'm willing to wait as long as the CBA allows!). Sorry, didn't mean to clutter this thread with a mock trade idea.

 

[yTrac24]

Josh Selby had a nice game in Canton tonight:

27 pts, 11 rebounds, 5 assists on 9-17 shooting. Take it with a grain of salt I guess since Kevin Jones had his usual dominant D-league performance as well (18 pts, 14 rebounds). Not a great fit for the Cavs IMO, I find his game awfully redundant with Kyrie and Dion on the roster. He could develop into a decent trade asset though.

 

[foucault87]

Maybe that duo can turn into the Kyrie/Tristan pg/pf combo of the D-League?

 

[Giambiwannabe7]

Josh Selby had a nice game in Canton tonight:

27 pts, 11 rebounds, 5 assists on 9-17 shooting. Take it with a grain of salt I guess since Kevin Jones had his usual dominant D-league performance as well (18 pts, 14 rebounds). Not a great fit for the Cavs IMO, I find his game awfully redundant with Kyrie and Dion on the roster. He could develop into a decent trade asset though.

Sometimes redundancy, especially from the floor general, can be a decent thing to have. It's nice when a guy can step in and display a similar skill set/play style than the starter ahead of him. It allows for the coach to keep a nice flow and is sometimes easier for the players around him. A change of pace guy is nice, but it sometimes disrupts the natural flow of the game and what the other players are used to.

I definitely see your point, but I'm not so sure it's a bad thing, especially when we have a guy like Livingston on the roster, who brings an entirely different style when he's on the court.

 

[staycoolbruh]

Interesting read. Many posters speculated this before but Hollinger specifies the exact reasoning behind the trade.

There is an interview with John Holinger on NBA.com - http://hangtime.blogs.nba.com/2013/03/01/q-a-with-grizzlies-vp-john-hollinger/

NBA.com: I think we all understand the basic reasoning for the Rudy Gay trade and that you have more flexibility going forward. But can you explain the reasoning behind the Cleveland trade in the context of the trade that followed?

Hollinger: One thing I think a lot of people don’t understand is that we still were facing a potential luxury tax hit even with the Rudy trade we made, because of certain incentive deals in our player contracts. So even though all those little charts on the Web had us $4 million and change into the tax, in reality our potential liability was about $6 million. Because of that, it was inevitable that another deal also had to be made in addition to a Rudy deal.

Also, there was a fairly important chess element to this — we were able to improve our leverage in the second deal by being under the tax, because beforehand people were demanding a premium for all the money they’d be saving us. The basketball offers for Rudy got better once we’d done this.

As for the particular deal we chose, it was clear given the frontcourt depth we had that moving off that [Marreese] Speights deal for both this year and next was the way to achieve the greatest savings at the least basketball cost. I suppose it’s possible he opts out of his deal now that he’s in Cleveland and getting minutes and playing well, but if he had stayed here and been our fifth big I’d say those odds were pretty minimal.

And going forward, if we’d had him on our books it would have been almost impossible to keep Tony Allen and stay under the tax. Obviously this isn’t the kind of move you’d prefer to make, but we came into a situation where our hands were really tied financially, and now we have options again.

While I have the floor, I’ll also point out two other things: First, that the Speights trade exception was parlayed into an even larger exception in the Rudy deal, because we took Daye into it, so we now have a $7.5 million chip that could prove valuable in the offseason. And second, that our breathing room allowed us to take in Dexter Pittman and a second-round pick at the trade deadline.

 

[Wine and Gold]

Interesting read. Many posters speculated this before but Hollinger specifies the exact reasoning behind the trade.

There is an interview with John Holinger on NBA.com - http://hangtime.blogs.nba.com/2013/03/01/q-a-with-grizzlies-vp-john-hollinger/

The number of trades like this one, that appear terribly imbalanced and lopsided will become more and more prevalent in the coming years. Team economics will become the driving force in most of the deals being made, actually.

 

[wuck]

I appreciate that Hollinger was interviewed about it and answered questions, but I'm surprised that the Memphis front office thought it was worth explaining things in that much detail. He has to learn the vague, ambiguous, unhelpful language of GM speak.

 

[MNCavsfan]

I appreciate that Hollinger was interviewed about it and answered questions, but I'm surprised that the Memphis front office thought it was worth explaining things in that much detail. He has to learn the vague, ambiguous, unhelpful language of GM speak.

Yeah. Fans don't want to see how the sausage is made. I also chuckled at the idea the trade gave them the flexibility to get a 2nd round pick and Pittman like that is somehow makes up for it.

 

[Wine and Gold]

I appreciate that Hollinger was interviewed about it and answered questions, but I'm surprised that the Memphis front office thought it was worth explaining things in that much detail. He has to learn the vague, ambiguous, unhelpful language of GM speak.

The best explanation is ...our owner refuses to pay any form of luxury tax. We were over a barrel, and they knew it.

 

[Jack Brickman]

I appreciate that Hollinger was interviewed about it and answered questions, but I'm surprised that the Memphis front office thought it was worth explaining things in that much detail. He has to learn the vague, ambiguous, unhelpful language of GM speak.

I'm not. The average fan doesn't understand NBA economics. What they saw was the team dealing away two serviceable role players and a project point guard for a bag of dicks. That's a hard sell to a fan base that probably only has only a small chunk of fans (let's say 10% or less) that understood the actual reasoning behind the deal when it was made. Coming out and explaining why the deal was done in depth doesn't undo the deal, but it at least gives their fan base (or at least the ones who read Hollinger's statement) a chance to understand the economics behind the deal.

 

[shoes22]

I'm not. The average fan doesn't understand NBA economics. What they saw was the team dealing away two serviceable role players and a project point guard for a bag of dicks. That's a hard sell to a fan base that probably only has only a small chunk of fans (let's say 10% or less) that understood the actual reasoning behind the deal when it was made. Coming out and explaining why the deal was done in depth doesn't undo the deal, but it at least gives their fan base (or at least the ones who read Hollinger's statement) a chance to understand the economics behind the deal.

Yeah I agree. It reminds me how the Indians front office had to explain to the fans and media why they had to trade away their star players that still had a year or two under contract. Except Hollinger did so more eloquently.