Antawn Wants and Expects to Remain with Cavs

[Derek]

I don't even have to look up Price's salary to know 100% for certain they would not match up....not even close. And give them 3 2nd's? Ummm...this will never happen.

The Pacers have a substantial amount of cap space, the salaries wouldn't have to match up. I do agree that 3 2nd rounders is a bit much though.

 

[Giambiwannabe7]

The Pacers have a substantial amount of cap space, the salaries wouldn't have to match up. I do agree that 3 2nd rounders is a bit much though.

I wasn't looking at the amnesty of Posey. Good catch. Still ain't happening, though.

 

[bigfoot5415]

The Pacers have a substantial amount of cap space, the salaries wouldn't have to match up. I do agree that 3 2nd rounders is a bit much though.

Ok I'm not one of those 10 year olds who post shit scenarios on here.I know my shit. Their cap is at about 14 mil plus the 800 k salary of price gets it close enough to balance out. Check anything online. The 2nd rounders won't mean jack to us if we can use them to facilitate a better deal. Let's say we did do 3 2nds, that would be equivalent to using our 2 extras and one of our own. We don't need 2 ends every year. Fine drop it down to two, that's like use giving up the exta ones we have this year and next.

Edit: sorry Dwreck, I was refering to smokinjoes smart ass comment. I misread your post.

 

[Giambiwannabe7]

Ok I'm not one of those 10 year olds who post shit scenarios on here.I know my shit. Their cap is at about 14 mil plus the 800 k salary of price gets it close enough to balance out. Check anything online. The 2nd rounders won't mean jack to us if we can use them to facilitate a better deal. Let's say we did do 3 2nds, that would be equivalent to using our 2 extras and one of our own. We don't need 2 ends every year. Fine drop it down to two, that's like use giving up the exta ones we have this year and next.

Edit: sorry Dwreck, I was refering to smokinjoes smart ass comment. I misread your post.

Don't be so sensitive, I wasn't being a smart ass at all. Indiana's pick would currently fall in the mid to late 20's. Why would we give up 3 2nd rounders for that? Are you honestly suggesting giving up a top pick in the second round(from NOH) in next year's draft AND OURS(which is likely to be around the 10 area) plus another the next year(which ORL could be terrible next year)? Come on, dude. That just doesn't seem to add up, imo. You're only moving up a handful of spots and sacrificing the ability to have numerous non-guaranteed contracts or picks that could be used in a more attractive package. There's not a whole lot of difference between the 25 pick and the 32 or 33 pick. We may not even be able to use the TPE next year. Sorry you think you have some golden ticket here, but I just disagree. Sorry if that hurts your feelings.

 

[bigfoot5415]

Don't be so sensitive, I wasn't being a smart ass at all. Indiana's pick would currently fall in the mid to late 20's. Why would we give up 3 2nd rounders for that? Are you honestly suggesting giving up a top pick in the second round(from NOH) in next year's draft AND OURS(which is likely to be around the 10 area) plus another the next year(which ORL could be terrible next year)? Come on, dude. That just doesn't seem to add up, imo. You're only moving up a handful of spots and sacrificing the ability to have numerous non-guaranteed contracts or picks that could be used in a more attractive package. There's not a whole lot of difference between the 25 pick and the 32 or 33 pick. We may not even be able to use the TPE next year. Sorry you think you have some golden ticket here, but I just disagree. Sorry if that hurts your feelings.

It wasn't the premise of the trade or the picks that irritated me. It was the comment about the salaries not matching up. That is the one thing that I am sure about when it comes to trades. My apologies. The deadline is a frustrating time. As for the pick, it looks like their picking 25, and are only a 1.5 games ahead of falling two more spots. I would easily give them ours this year and one next year.

 

[wuck]

The deadline is a frustrating time.

You better pace yourself. We have 17 more days. :chuckles:

 

[bigfoot5415]

You better pace yourself. We have 17 more days. :chuckles:

I actually have a lot of off days coming up. That should do the trick.

We have so many opportunites to take a huge leap. I hope we don't piss it away

 

[Giambiwannabe7]

It wasn't the premise of the trade or the picks that irritated me. It was the comment about the salaries not matching up. That is the one thing that I am sure about when it comes to trades. My apologies. The deadline is a frustrating time. As for the pick, it looks like their picking 25, and are only a 1.5 games ahead of falling two more spots. I would easily give them ours this year and one next year.

To which I immediately thanked the poster for correcting my mistake of not accounting for the Posey amnesty. No apology necessary, it's all good.
Yes, they are only 1.5 ahead of dropping a couple spots, but they are even closer than that to passing the LAC and moving up another spot!

 

[bigfoot5415]

To which I immediately thanked the poster for correcting my mistake of not accounting for the Posey amnesty. No apology necessary, it's all good.
Yes, they are only 1.5 ahead of dropping a couple spots, but they are even closer than that to passing the LAC and moving up another spot!

That is a good point. I can only see so much on mobile, so I like to shoot first and ask questions later lol.

 

[The Process God]

His win shares/48 have gone up because we're winning a higher % of our games

Right now Matt Barnes has .144 WS/48 and Troy Murphy has .106 for the Lakers. It's not because they're contributing to wins any more than Jamison is, it's because the Lakers have more wins. That's why you can't compare one guys WS to another guy's on a different team. The 10-11 Cavs are a different team than the 11-12 Cavs, you can't compare WS.

Then why can Jon and others use last season to prove their point and I can't? It goes both ways, people.

 

[Derek]

Then why can Jon and others use last season to prove their point and I can't? It goes both ways, people.

You can use whatever stats you want from last year or any year to prove your points , just not win shares.

 

[The Process God]

You can use whatever stats you want from last year or any year to prove your points , just not win shares.

I disagree. You said I can't use that stat because it's going up due to more winning. I could just as easily say that the win shares stat is going up because Antawn is causing the winning. Sure, we have Kyrie, but Antawn has been a direct influence on a lot of wins to the point that that Samardo, TT, and the rest of the team or whoever could not have picked up the slack to do the same thing.

 

[Jon]

Then why can Jon and others use last season to prove their point and I can't? It goes both ways, people.

I don't think D-Wreck ever gave me his permission.

But it's still a solid point that a stat like WS is not only relative to the group you're playing with but the team's ability to win. What we're trying to do here is isolate Jamison's contribution to winning - in other words, are we winning because of him, or in spite of him.

In Jamison's case there are a lot of mixed signals. Some of them do support your case, some of them not so much. Yet, across the board his numbers are identical to last season or slightly worse. Which leads me to believe there are two options: either his intangibles have improved (huh? wha?) or the guys around him are producing more, screwing up less. I'd call this the subtract JJ, add Kyrie, play with Andy factor; but all I can say is there's evidence of this.

 

[Derek]

I disagree. You said I can't use that stat because it's going up due to more winning. I could just as easily say that the win shares stat is going up because Antawn is causing the winning. Sure, we have Kyrie, but Antawn has been a direct influence on a lot of wins to the point that that Samardo, TT, and the rest of the team or whoever could not have picked up the slack to do the same thing.

You can use WS, you just can't compare them straight up like you did.

Last year Jamison had .067 WS/48 and we were 9-47 for a win % of .161
This year he has .115 WS/48 and we are 13-18 for a win % of .419

As you can see, our wins have increased at a much greater rate than his win shares have, he's not playing any better, the team around him has just improved. Jamison is the same guy he's always been and getting rid of him won't hurt our win total that much.

 

[Tornicade]

You can use WS, you just can't compare them straight up like you did.

Last year Jamison had .067 WS/48 and we were 9-47 for a win % of .161
This year he has .115 WS/48 and we are 13-18 for a win % of .419

As you can see, our wins have increased at a much greater rate than his win shares have, he's not playing any better, the team around him has just improved. Jamison is the same guy he's always been and getting rid of him won't hurt our win total that much.

how dare you use stats in context !