• Changing RCF's index page, please click on "Forums" to access the forums.

2019 NBA Draft Lottery

Do Not Sell My Personal Information
NMCav said:
I've been a fan of Colby White for a while. His lack of length is concerning if we play him at SG though.
Click to expand...

I’m bothered by White & Culver’s lack of length. Usually a guy has to be a superior athlete to overcome that, as Brandon Clarke is. It doesn’t seem that White & Culver are the same type of athletes however.
 
thedarkness2332 said:
And if we get anywhere close to 35 wins, we just shot oursleves right in the foot.

It would be incredibly asinine to make a run this season.

If this team does what it is supposed to, it will be developing young players.

Getting anywhere on the backs of veterans is path suicide.

If Kevin Love is playing well enough to have us overachieving at the break, he will likely be dealt or rested.
Click to expand...

Bingo. This year should be all about development and retaining that first round pick. I’d much prefer to trade Love and get some worthwhile assets for him than just sitting him and watching him depreciate on our bench. That makes no sense to me.
 
Last edited:
sailfish said:
Here’s some interesting Cavs-related tweets from Steve Kyler:

View: https://mobile.twitter.com/stevekylerNBA/status/1139577699289186305

View: https://mobile.twitter.com/stevekylerNBA/status/1139584603029721089

View: https://mobile.twitter.com/stevekylerNBA/status/1139586156037885952

View: https://mobile.twitter.com/stevekylerNBA/status/1139869918579646466


View: https://mobile.twitter.com/stevekylerNBA/status/1139871314985070592
Click to expand...

I saw this the other day. Initially, I felt that #10 & #17 for #5 was an extremely disappointing return. I know a lot of folks on here have been thinking, #8, #10, & #17, which I always thought was unrealistic. But #8 & #10 felt about right to me.

Then I realized, I guess it doesn't really matter if it's #8 or #10 as long as the Cavs get who they want with whichever pick it is (presuming Reddish). Just think the initial optics of taking the two lesser picks felt like we would be getting ripped off.

I should also say that any trade with a combination of the Hawks 1st, would probably include some 2nd's as well, and most likely them giving us our pick back that we traded them. So that all would play into the deal as well.

EDIT: Also Kyler is not Woj, so, maybe he's full of shit.
 
Area Code 330 said:
I saw this the other day. Initially, I felt that #10 & #17 for #5 was an extremely disappointing return. I know a lot of folks on here have been thinking, #8, #10, & #17, which I always thought was unrealistic. But #8 & #10 felt about right to me.

Then I realized, I guess it doesn't really matter if it's #8 or #10 as long as the Cavs get who they want with whichever pick it is (presuming Reddish). Just think the initial optics of taking the two lesser picks felt like we would be getting ripped off.

I should also say that any trade with a combination of the Hawks 1st, would probably include some 2nd's as well, and most likely them giving us our pick back that we traded them. So that all would play into the deal as well.

EDIT: Also Kyler is not Woj, so, maybe he's full of shit.
Click to expand...

I wouldn’t necessarily be disappointed with getting 10 and 17 for the 5th pick, under two conditions:

1) at #10, we can get the player we are targeting, whether it’s Reddish or whomever.

2) we get something additional in the deal, whether it’s additional protections on the 2020 pick that we owe to Atlanta and/or one of the Hawks 3 second round picks this year.
 
sailfish said:
Here’s some interesting Cavs-related tweets from Steve Kyler:

View: https://mobile.twitter.com/stevekylerNBA/status/1139577699289186305

View: https://mobile.twitter.com/stevekylerNBA/status/1139584603029721089

View: https://mobile.twitter.com/stevekylerNBA/status/1139586156037885952

View: https://mobile.twitter.com/stevekylerNBA/status/1139869918579646466


View: https://mobile.twitter.com/stevekylerNBA/status/1139871314985070592
Click to expand...

This scenario only makes sense if the Cavs really want Culver. Otherwise, you are picking a guy you don't want at #5 in hopes that the guy you do want will be there at #10. And if he isn't, you are stuck with Culver while someone else takes Reddish in between.
 
CalBuckeyeRob said:
This scenario only makes sense if the Cavs really want Culver. Otherwise, you are picking a guy you don't want at #5 in hopes that the guy you do want will be there at #10. And if he isn't, you are stuck with Culver while someone else takes Reddish in between.
Click to expand...

Also from the Hawks side why risk the trade when Reddish could taken at #9.

My guess is the Cavs know other teams want Culver and are prepared to take him at #5 then trade him to whoever calls with the best offer. The Suns or Bulls could add assets where we definitely get Reddish and not have to risk it for #17.
 
sailfish said:
I can’t escape the feeling that Langford & Reddish are being undervalued and some team is going to get a bargain with them. I admire the fact that Langford played through injury at Indiana, even if their season didn’t go as some predicted or thought it would. It seems hypocritical that Garland’s sits out the year with injury and his stock goes up whereas Langford guts it out and his stock goes down. Lesson learned, I suppose...
Click to expand...
True, both are more than capable of outperforming expectations given both had poor college seasons compared to what they came into college expected to be and for different but injury explained reasons.
I think so many of the couch scouts out there only base their opinions on winners but it's a team sport and often the best teams in college like Virginia and TT are that successful based on the system not the individuals.
In the NBA it's all about individual achievements within the system.
I for example am much higher on the idea of trading back if it nets them a higher ceiling guy that needs work or just needs the NBA to open up their game and pick up another first or future asset then to settle on a player that did well in college systems and is pushing the age limit on upside
 
I just read some rumblings of ATL using some combo of their picks to jump to #4 in the AD to LA trade in a 4-way deal with WAS. Framework was something like:

AD to LAL

Beal, LAL players to NOP

#4 to ATL

2 of #8, #10, #17 to WAS

I think I saw other salary and maybe the LAL players split up, but this was the general framework.


In this scenario, ATL jumps us and probably takes Culver. If we like Reddish that bad, we might be stuck taking him at #5.....unless we can get PHX or CHI to bite on a trade up for Garland.

I have no idea on the actual validity of this, but something to look out for.
 
CalBuckeyeRob said:
This scenario only makes sense if the Cavs really want Culver. Otherwise, you are picking a guy you don't want at #5 in hopes that the guy you do want will be there at #10. And if he isn't, you are stuck with Culver while someone else takes Reddish in between.
Click to expand...

Maybe the Cavs have a group of players rated equally and would be fine with any of them? That could very well be the case and, if it is, why not pickup an additional pick or two while still getting a guy you like equally to Culver or whomever?
 
PITCavsFan said:
I just read some rumblings of ATL using some combo of their picks to jump to #4 in the AD to LA trade in a 4-way deal with WAS. Framework was something like:

AD to LAL

Beal, LAL players to NOP

#4 to ATL

2 of #8, #10, #17 to WAS

I think I saw other salary and maybe the LAL players split up, but this was the general framework.


In this scenario, ATL jumps us and probably takes Culver. If we like Reddish that bad, we might be stuck taking him at #5.....unless we can get PHX or CHI to bite on a trade up for Garland.

I have no idea on the actual validity of this, but something to look out for.
Click to expand...

Washington doesn’t even have a GM and the owner has said he wants to keep Beal. I can’t see them making such a move until, at least, until a GM is hired.
 
So with the Pelicans having the 4th now, and with:

Zion
Lonzo
Ingram

Who do they pick at #4? I’m hoping they like Hunter or Garland over Culver. If they’re truly gonna build around those 3 guys (assuming Holiday is not part of their future), they don’t really need another ball-dominant player.
 
Now with the AD trade to the Lakers, the question for the Cavs is who does Griff targets at #4.

I figure it's Culver or Garland for the Pelicans. I think Hunter at #4 becomes the best case scenario for the Cavs. Then the Cavs can hopefully pit the Suns, Bulls, and Hawks against each other for Garland or Culver. A parley for trade down with both could be in play for the Cavs. Trade down to #6 with the Suns so they secure Garland and trade #6 to the Bulls or Hawks for Culver.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Rubber Rim Job Podcast Video

Episode 3-14: "Time for Playoff Vengeance on Mickey"

Rubber Rim Job Podcast Spotify

Episode 3:14: " Time for Playoff Vengeance on Mickey."
Top