2012 Draft

[UDcleveland]

I feel like we'd really be rolling the dice there. It would be great IMO if we end up with Barnes and Ross, Barnes and Lamb, or Beal and PJIII. But who knows who will be left at 11.

 

[3 Ball...GOT IT]

WOW, the fact that we could fill 4 of our 5 starters (assuming we do swap picks and get a pair of wings) in just two drafts is a pretty good rebuilding process lol

 

[wuck]

The report doesn't say more than that they had a conversation. It could have gone:

Chris Grant: Would you be interested in swapping? Portland: No.

But it is a very good thing that the Cavs are exploring various options.

 

[NtG]

I feel like we'd really be rolling the dice there. It would be great IMO if we end up with Barnes and Ross, Barnes and Lamb, or Beal and PJIII. But who knows who will be left at 11.

Yes please!

 

["Boobie" Gibson]

Meyers Leonard at 11. Great fit next to TT and an appropriate place for selecting him. He's a fairly good free throw shooter for a big man which would also be a plus.

Irving
? - draft SG with both second rounders, and hopefully hit on one of them
Barnes
Thompson
Leonard

EDIT: Zeller is also an option.

 

[UDcleveland]

I would expect us to pull the trigger on something like that if the top 3 goes Davis, Robinson, MKG. Assuming Portland takes Drummond, we get either Beal or Barnes, and move up our 2nd pick by 13 spots. Seems like it could come down to whether or not the Cavs see a huge difference in value between Beal and Barnes.

 

[Triumph36]

WOW, the fact that we could fill 4 of our 5 starters (assuming we do swap picks and get a pair of wings) in just two drafts is a pretty good rebuilding process lol

see, this i don't like. i think quality >>>> quantity. teams win because of the talent at the top of their roster, not the middle (or lower).

i've said it before, but where drummond lands is huge. cleveland seems to be a really good - not quite perfect - place to go in order to maximize his potential. it might take a few years, which is fine; but if drummond is playing here i think he'll easily be better than anyone the cavs could get at #6/#11.

then of course the cavs still get #24, which could be useful. miller, white, nicholson, etc are all projected to go around there.

edit: fwiw, kings spent quite a bit of time trying to move evans to sf last year. something to take into consideration when projecting who they'd draft between beal/barnes.

 

[3 Ball...GOT IT]

see, this i don't like. i think quality >>>> quantity. teams win because of the talent at the top of their roster, not the middle (or lower).

i've said it before, but where drummond lands is huge. cleveland seems to be a really good - not quite perfect - place to go in order to maximize his potential. it might take a few years, which is fine; but if drummond is playing here i think he'll easily be better than anyone the cavs could get at #6/#11.

then of course the cavs still get #24, which could be useful. miller, white, nicholson, etc are all projected to go around there.

That may be true, but you can't go wrong with a possible swap if they are locked in a Barnes, whether at four or six. Which, if true, would give you quality over quantity. I don't think they would do the trade unless they were certain they could get the player they want at six, who they are also willing to take at 4.

 

[OptimusPrime]

I hate the trade. Moving down would be a disaster. At 4 one of Drummond/MKG/Beal are available. At 6 they are all gone and we are left with a scrub like Barnes.

 

[NorthCoastBias]

I hate the trade. Moving down would be a disaster. At 4 one of Drummond/MKG/Beal are available. At 6 they are all gone and we are left with a scrub like Barnes.

I agree. Why limit the options available to you? The 4th pick is a great spot IMO.

 

[3 Ball...GOT IT]

I agree. Why limit the options available to you? The 4th pick is a great spot IMO.

I agree if you are interested in multiple players. Personally I wouldn't trade, because I don't want Barnes. But if the talk is true (who knows) and they are locked in on Barnes, they have no real reason NOT to trade down, when they know they can get him at six.

 

[Mdog1]

I hate the trade. Moving down would be a disaster. At 4 one of Drummond/MKG/Beal are available. At 6 they are all gone and we are left with a scrub like Barnes.

I'm with you about trading down. I hate the idea, unless we can get Drummond/Beal at 6 and Ross/Moultrie at 11. Ross/Moultire is certainly likely at 11, but Drummond and Beal at 6 is not likely at all. A Barnes and Moultire draft is not something I hate though

 

[Triumph36]

That may be true, but you can't go wrong with a possible swap if they are locked in a Barnes, whether at four or six. Which, if true, would give you quality over quantity. I don't think they would do the trade unless they were certain they could get the player they want at six, who they are also willing to take at 4.

this is where i disagree

not a fan of barnes

I hate the trade. Moving down would be a disaster. At 4 one of Drummond/MKG/Beal are available. At 6 they are all gone and we are left with a scrub like Barnes.

yah a few days ago i was trying to think of good trades in which the cavs move down. came up with 0.

pls no moving down.

 

[*L-Train*]

if the Cavs are locked in on picking Barnes i'm all for it...move down and get the 2nd lottery pick

on a side note they should wait with that trade till they know who's available at #4 (if Beal/MKG somehow falls...)

 

[3 Ball...GOT IT]

this is where i disagree

not a fan of barnes

yah a few days ago i was trying to think of good trades in which the cavs move down. came up with 0.

pls no moving down.

haha I'm right with you on Barnes. It's too bad though that the Cavs think Barnes is top quality over certain other guys