Anderson Varejao Trade Ideas

[Rob]

Even though I disagree, at least that's a completely fair debate. Honestly, I like both of them.

I am just against the Clippers deal for 2 main reasons, and they both involve DeAndre Jordan. Really don't like the idea of him taking up over 10 mil a year in cap space. I don't think he's that good, and there are plenty of better options out there. Although, it wouldn't be that bad if TT was good on offense. Don't really want our future big men both being incapable on offense. Been there done that with the LeBron era.

If we had a good offensive PF then I'd be all for DeAndre Jordan to be honest. I just don't want our big men to average 15 ppg together.

[Tank God]

This is going to be a bit long, just a heads up.

This seems to be a more plausible scenario than the others that have been discussed (particularly those that include Lamb, who I think was the key piece, of all the other assets (Martin and TOR pick) in the OKC-Houston trade. A few things strike me as important when thinking about an CLE-OKC trade around Perkins and Varejao:

1. OKC's Competing in the West this year.

With the Lakers' rough start (and even anticipating them picking it up by the playoffs) and their familiarity with the Spurs, I think OKC has to be confident that even with the Harden trade, they are in a position to win the West. Kevin Martin has played very well for them in his role. He's certainly not the ball-handler/creator that Harden was/is, but the production lost between the two guards within OKC's offense has not been severe enough to relegate the Thunder out of a favored position to win the West.

With Maynor serving as the second unit's initiator, Harden's creative abilities are, to an extent, covered. Consequently (channeling my inner AC), I think there is good reason to believe OKC would be buyers in the trade market driven by the belief that they are only missing one more piece - particularly for a hustle big who doesn't need the ball to be effective and influence the game in a positive way. Imagine the value of extra possessions AV would give OKC compared to Cleveland -- he wouldn't be giving the ball back to Irving/Waiters/Gee, but to Westbrook/Martin/Durant.

An extra thought: perhaps with OKC anticipating Martin leaving after this year (unless he plays so well that they are willing to sign him long term), there may be a slight drop off in the competitiveness of the Thunder with Lamb taking on his role in 2013-2014. This may add to OKC's willingness to buy this year, as opposed to others.

2. Ben's Twitter Post about CLE's reaction to OKC-HOU trade

Some in the Cavs organization thought Houston got fleeced in the Harden deal...

— realcavsfans.com (@realcavsfans) November 3, 2012

So, obviously the Cavs value Lamb, Martin, and that TOR pick. Moreover, they obviously had some interest in Harden (even if CLE wasn't interested in signing him to a max deal) -- so using a quasi-transposition property, I think you can gauge the Cavs' interest in the prospect of trading a player like AV for some of the assets of that OKC-HOU trade. Would Cleveland trade AV for Harden? Would Cleveland trade AV for Martin, Lamb, and the TOR pick?

I know these are fairly gross simplifications, but they might be helpful in getting a sense of what the Cavs front office specifically values (particular assets, like that TOR pick) on the market. I don't think AV has the value of a Harden, for obvious reasons. Nevertheless, with Perry Jones already already being relegated to a filler role on this current OKC roster and Lamb pegged as the future SG, I think the idea of Perry Jones rather than Lamb as a trade piece is understandable.

3. About Perry Jones III's fit on the current Cavs roster

(Channeling my inner Eli) I was not on board with the prospect of drafting Perry Jones in the top 15 of the draft. I did not think, with the composition of the Cavs roster as it was a few months ago, that he would be a good fit. That said, with two initiators/attackers/creators on the Cavs in Irving and Waiters, I think Perry Jones would be a potentially great/productive fit in our current rotation.

He would not have the scoring responsibility he would have otherwise had on a Cavs roster that did not feature Waiters and Irving. He is versatile as a SF/PF (the Cavs like players who can play multiple spots), and would fit well into the pick and pop/high post game in Byron Scott's offense. I'm not sure I see him as starting SF or PF, but in the case he were to play PF, the Cavs could move TT to the bench in a role more suitable for him and invest in young big in the draft (be it Noel, Austin, Zeller, Len) - and not worry as much about a lack of offense compared to if TT were in that lineup.

Quick Note: you have to believe OKC, if they were really interested in Varejao, would be more willing to discuss Jones more than Lamb (considered the current adequacy of OKC's roster at SF/PF - re: Durant). So, like I said above, AV doesn't have the same value as Harden. Likewise, Jones doesn't have the value of Lamb. I see a possible compromise between CLE and OKC considering these players' values.

4. Reggie Jackson and Eric Maynor

This is a bit of a pipe dream, but if AV keeps on playing at the level he is, it may not end up being one. The Thunder need to decide whether or not they are going to re-up Eric Maynor. My guess is that they will want to, especially considering his more important role that Harden is gone, Martin isn't the ball-handler Harden is, and neither is Lamb. If they do re-sign him (and there will be a competitive market for him, I imagine), that leaves Reggie Jackson, their 1st round pick out of BC a few years ago, 3rd on the depth chart.

I do not need to go into detail about the casserole of nonsense that is the Cavs bench - we all know this. Jackson would be a welcome addition to the roster and rotation (with respect to both his youth and positional value) - and, if OKC decides to commit to Maynor by midseason, may be a viable trade candidate.

________________________________

All this said, a potential trade I could imagine happening between the Cavs and Thunder is something like this:

Varejao
Gibson
SAC 1st (Windhorst mentioned in the RCF podcast that he imagined Cleveland would look to trade this pick)
MIA 1st or ORL 2nd?

for

TOR 1st
Perry Jones III
Kendrick Perkins
Reggie Jackson

You had me hooked until you actually proposed a trade. The Sac first is going to be not much worse the Toronto 1st. That really cuts down Andy's value if you include that in the trade because it basically says that Andy's value is only as good as the difference between the Sac 1st and the Toronto 1st or even less if you include all that other stuff you suggested we trade. I would push to get the trade done with only Andy and Boobie or even just Andy. Those picks don't need to be included on Cleveland's end. Andy has the value to pull the trade off especially since we're doing them a favor by taking on Kendrick Perkins' contract already.

My trade:

Andy

TOR 1st
Perry Jones III
Kendrick Perkins

OR (if you want to)

Varejao
Boobie

TOR 1st
Perry Jones III
Kendrick Perkins
Reggie Jackson

Again, those picks don't need to be put in. We're a in a seller's market where, if OKC wants to win badly and win for a long time, they will make the move.

[Nathan S]

Year-NBA Champion's Oldest Starter-Age

2012: Shane Battier -----------------33
2011: Jason Kidd---------------------38
2010: Derek Fisher-------------------35
2009: Derek Fisher-------------------34
2008: Ray Allen & Kevin Garnett ------32
2007: Bruce Bowen-------------------35
2006: Shaquille O'Neal----------------34
2005: Bruce Bowen-------------------33
2004: Gary Payton--------------------35
2003: David Robinson-----------------37
2002: Rick Fox------------------------32
2001: Horace Grant-------------------35
2000: Ron Harper & A.C. Green--------36
1999: Mario Elie----------------------35
1998: MJ & Ron Harper----------------34
1997: Dennis Rodman-----------------35
1996: Dennis Rodman-----------------34
1995: Hakeem & Clyde Drexler---------32
1994: Hakeem & Otis Thorpe----------31
1993: Bill Cartwright------------------35
1992: Bill Cartwright------------------34
1991: Bill Cartwright------------------33
1990: James Edwards-----------------34
1989: Bill Lambier---------------------31
1988: Kareem Abdul-Jabbar-----------40 (lol)

9 of the last 10 and 20 of the last 25 NBA champions have featured at least one starter aged 33 or older. Superstar or roleplayer, big or small, at least one player aged 33 or older plays an important part in almost every single championship. Make of that what you will.

[petes999]

Cavs won't trade V this year. They have been firm on only integrating two players via draft each year. If they keep all four picks, it will be stashing a Euro player. Yet, we will have Top-10 in our pick, Top-20 or near there with LA swap that we can up grade with second rounders.

Yet, people are under valuing V. Wallace got a NJ Nets pick that was only top-3 protected when they were 4-1/2 out of playoffs. Toronto pick is obviously better, but V is better than an aged Wallace and better contract.

Same with V and Harden on contract. Harden is obviously better than V and better health. But, he was only a one year rental while V has a few years of a team friendly contract. Thus, you aren't going to get Toronto pick and Lamb for V, but it isn't that far off when Wallace to Port. a high pick.

If anything, save V for next year unless he gets you the Toronto pick straight up - maybe add PJIII for Orlando second as V should at least get 5-10 pick or two mid 1sts - so we play hardball. If V stays healthy this year, his value is higher for the 2nd 2014 1st pick. Yet, Cleveland will not sell low due to his intangible value of team leader with hustle and fan favorite.

If we want a third first, why not Gibson and 2nd from orl. for late 1st with contender? When can the use LA plus this other first to go lower possibly to 10-15 as we got 17 with 2 seconds and 24th last year.

[Triumph36]

I don't disagree with your stance on the Clippers side or Jordan, but...

Tell me how Bledsoe isn't appealing? He's a combo guard and a back up guard, something we desperately need. Plus he's actually efficient on the offensive side and, as you said, is an extremely good defender. Again, what's not appealing?

As for Jordan, not sure if you saw my original post but this would demand the Cavs to go after a scoring PF in Free Agency or the draft.

The pick is just another asset. Of course quality>quantity, but the quality we'd receive isn't chump change. Bledsoe & Jordan would be 2 excellent, young pieces.

And nobody is going to give up a lotto pick for Anderson cause the teams interested in Anderson won't be in the lottery.

Bledsoe isn't really a combo guard - he's tiny.

I'm saying he's not that appealing because he's a SG in a PG's body and the Cavs already have their star PG. Getting a backup 1 that will play like 20mpg isn't all that attractive when the Cavs are trading their only real valuable piece they can afford to give up. Yes, it's nice but the most attractive option? Eh.

Yeah, I typed that on my phone so missed the scoring PF comment. I think that is the route the Cavs should've gone before even drafting TT because that's what most successful teams do. But with Jordan, the Cavs would basically need a legit star scoring PF with range - not the easiest player to find in free agency. The draft is an option, but obv there's no guarantee they'll have the opportunity to select someone that fills that need. It kinda backs them into a corner in which they'd likely need a very specific type of player to ever contend.

The lotto comment was mostly in regards to OKC, a deal which I'd easily prefer over LAC's if they offer the TOR pick + Lamb/PJ3. I've said quite a few times that I don't think OKC would do that, but people seem convinced otherwise so I was going by that option (or some variant) being on the table. If there is no lottery pick, then yeah I probably do the LAC trade.

Raptors pick and Lamb/PJ3/Jackson > Jordan, Bledsoe, Clippers pick

Yeah, this.

The Clipper trade doesn't have any star potential, which is a huge need for the Cavs. The Toronto pick is top 3 protected, but stars can still be found in the 4-10 range where the Cavs will probably end up picking.

Basically, the Clipper trade is the safer option but OKC has more upside.

The Sac first is going to be not much worse the Toronto 1st.

lol what? this is completely wrong. like, factually wrong. they couldn't be more different. the kings "1st" is lottery protected forever and the kings are still awful with seemingly no end in sight. the raptors pick is reverse-lottery protected plus top 3 (2, 2, and 1 in the following years).

there is a very realistic chance the cavs never even see the kings pick.

["Boobie" Gibson]

there is a very realistic chance the cavs never even see the kings pick.

Lol. Top-13 in 2013, top-12 in 2014, top-10 in 2015-2017. If we don't have it by then, we get their second rounder provided it is within the first 55 picks.

So basically, there is a 100% chance we will see the pick by 2017.

So, like.. saying we won't see it like, ever, is factually wrong.

[Triumph36]

Lol. Top-13 in 2013, top-12 in 2014, top-10 in 2015-2017. If we don't have it by then, we get their second rounder provided it is within the first 55 picks.

So basically, there is a 100% chance we will see the pick by 2017.

So, like.. saying we won't see it like, ever, is factually wrong.

accidentally forgot to include "as a 1st rounder" in that. which is true.

but nice catch! you still seem a little bitter that i called out your delusion over the young core.

[jlegg21]

Still feel like there's a contingent on this site that absolutely cannot be realistic about Varejao and his value. I'm holding out hope there's a GM somewhere in the NBA who agrees.

I dont think it's very realistic to expect a GM like Presti to break what's left of his piggy bank for AV, especially after he dealt a very popular piece of his core and possibly his 2nd best offensive player. I hope I'm wrong since their window is now and AV definitely brings what they're missing, but I just have a feeling.

That Sacramento pick might as well not exist, being that Sacramento freaking sucks with no end in sight. Stop acting like it's an asset when any GM in the league knows better. It's a second rounder a half a decade from now, at best.

For the record, I'd do cartwheels if we got a top-3 protected pick this year to go with our own 1st. That alone would make the trade for me.

[LNance]

I look at OKC front court production every time they play.

Perk: 21 minutes, 2 points, 1 board
Collison: 22 minutes, 1 point, 1 board
Thabeet: 22 minutes, 3 points, 9 boards

I don't see how OKC can't look to trading for AV when both Perk and Collison are averaging under 5 points per game.

[randymoss1881]

I look at OKC front court production every time they play.

Perk: 21 minutes, 2 points, 1 board
Collison: 22 minutes, 1 point, 1 board
Thabeet: 22 minutes, 3 points, 9 boards

I don't see how OKC can't look to trading for AV when both Perk and Collison are averaging under 5 points per game.

Damn thats whack...... im just dreamin of us getting that raptor pick and out pick being top 5 and comming out with poythress and Len or (mcadoo,noel, or zeller)

[Frank Reynolds]

Any time you have to give Hasheem Thabeet valuable minutes, you definitely need to look into aquiring Varejao. Another under appreciated element would be Russell Westbrook's crazy drives to the rim that cause the defense to swarm him quickly, with Varejao cutting on the baseline like he does Westbrook would have a much easier play to make than trying to finish amongst the trees. Westbrook can get into the paint any time he wants.
I don't see how OKC can't look to trading for AV when both Perk and Collison are averaging under 5 points per game.[/QUOTE]

[Tank God]

Bledsoe isn't really a combo guard - he's tiny.

I'm saying he's not that appealing because he's a SG in a PG's body and the Cavs already have their star PG. Getting a backup 1 that will play like 20mpg isn't all that attractive when the Cavs are trading their only real valuable piece they can afford to give up. Yes, it's nice but the most attractive option? Eh.

Yeah, I typed that on my phone so missed the scoring PF comment. I think that is the route the Cavs should've gone before even drafting TT because that's what most successful teams do. But with Jordan, the Cavs would basically need a legit star scoring PF with range - not the easiest player to find in free agency. The draft is an option, but obv there's no guarantee they'll have the opportunity to select someone that fills that need. It kinda backs them into a corner in which they'd likely need a very specific type of player to ever contend.

The lotto comment was mostly in regards to OKC, a deal which I'd easily prefer over LAC's if they offer the TOR pick + Lamb/PJ3. I've said quite a few times that I don't think OKC would do that, but people seem convinced otherwise so I was going by that option (or some variant) being on the table. If there is no lottery pick, then yeah I probably do the LAC trade.

Yeah, this.

The Clipper trade doesn't have any star potential, which is a huge need for the Cavs. The Toronto pick is top 3 protected, but stars can still be found in the 4-10 range where the Cavs will probably end up picking.

Basically, the Clipper trade is the safer option but OKC has more upside.

lol what? this is completely wrong. like, factually wrong. they couldn't be more different. the kings "1st" is lottery protected forever and the kings are still awful with seemingly no end in sight. the raptors pick is reverse-lottery protected plus top 3 (2, 2, and 1 in the following years).

there is a very realistic chance the cavs never even see the kings pick.

Ok then. Let's look at it realistically here then. So the TOR pick is likely to be in the 4-10 range. Let's put it in the middle and say 7. Now, as for the SAC pick, the Kings would have to break the league record in most seasons gone without making the playoffs in order for us to never see that pick. On top of that, they don't even have to make the playoffs in order for us to see that pick. We only need them to be 19th or better once. Let's say that pick falls at 12th since I doubt that the Kings will be too far off from 10th. That's a whopping five spots. Is Varejao + another 1st + Boobie only worth those five spots? That's asinine if you ask me. It's also asinine if you don't think we will be seeing a high pick out of the SAC 1st. Like I said, SAC would have to have never been 19th or better in the league all the way until 2017. That won't happen.

[CruiserNFL]

I look at OKC front court production every time they play.

Perk: 21 minutes, 2 points, 1 board
Collison: 22 minutes, 1 point, 1 board
Thabeet: 22 minutes, 3 points, 9 boards

I don't see how OKC can't look to trading for AV when both Perk and Collison are averaging under 5 points per game.

Hope OKC would look at the Nets game tape, because if they look at the Mavs game they might see:

Andy v Mavs 38 minutes, 4 points, 7 boards. That line makes Thabeet look good.

[runningfan2]

Here's another thought. I'm not a fan of trading Andy within the division, but the Bucks might be a candidate. A trade of Andy for Larry Sanders, Tobias Harris, Beno Udrih, and a first round pick makes sense for both teams. The Bucks get a borderline All-Star big who fits very well with Ellis and Jennings and could make them the favorites for a playoff spot, something that is the immediate goal for Milwaukee. It also saves the Bucks a few million in immediate money. The Cavs get a promising young big in Sanders, a solid young player in Harris, a first round pick that will likely be just outside the lottery, and a great backup pg in Udrih. The Bucks likely make the playoffs and the Cavs get younger and improve their bench, while giving up some defense for at least the immediate future.

[Malt]

Ok then. Let's look at it realistically here then. So the TOR pick is likely to be in the 4-10 range. Let's put it in the middle and say 7. Now, as for the SAC pick, the Kings would have to break the league record in most seasons gone without making the playoffs in order for us to never see that pick. On top of that, they don't even have to make the playoffs in order for us to see that pick. We only need them to be 19th or better once. Let's say that pick falls at 12th since I doubt that the Kings will be too far off from 10th. That's a whopping five spots. Is Varejao + another 1st + Boobie only worth those five spots? That's asinine if you ask me. It's also asinine if you don't think we will be seeing a high pick out of the SAC 1st. Like I said, SAC would have to have never been 19th or better in the league all the way until 2017. That won't happen.

This logic is all sorts of terrible.

Let's break this down: Toronto's pick, which you placed at 7 (reasonable) is very likely to be redeemed this season, meaning it would be a top 10 pick now. SAC's pick is heavily protected and, at best, will be a very late lottery choice in the next 4 years; this year is looking very unlikely. Your logic for seeing that pick is the likelihood the Kings will find the playoffs at least once in that stretch, but place the pick the Cavs are likely to receive at 12, which is almost the best case scenario for that pick, and not possible if the Kings make the playoffs. A more reasonable place to hope for that pick is around 14-18, where a role player is a best case scenario.

At 7, you have a chance at drafting an impact player. We aren't talking about 5 spots in the same draft. We're talking closer to 10 spots, and a player you add to this young roster now instead of 3-4 years down the road.

I'm not even sure how I feel about the trade; I'd want a bit more than just the pick, say PJ3, but your logic against it is faulty and misleading.