2012 Draft

[chrisrich91]

You dont take on salary for two worthless players. , trade one of your most competent players and a 24th pick to get a 7th pick in the draft.

That isnt getting value out of AV. its called getting fleeced.

Now if GSW wants to throw in bogut or Lee into the deal. that a different story.

I see what you're doing.

I don't think the GM of the Warriors reads this board, but good try

 

[Ohio]

If the ball is in the Cavs court on this deal, I think they haven't accepted it yet because they don't know who will still be there at #7, and that could be the dealbreaker for them. They don't wanna take the deal now, to have Drummond, Barnes, Lamb off the board and have to settle for Rivers or Henson

 

[AvonCavsFan]

Everyone is making this out like it is AV straight up for #7. That is not the case, we are adding 24 AND taking back salary for a player who won't even play for us(beans).

So this is the trade
AV, Q Miller and 18 million
for
Maybe Drummond? Lamb? Waiters?

Really?

What if Drummond is a bust? Great! We get to draft high again next year and the year after! Awesome that we get to waist Kyrie's rookie contract.

AV's age in each of the next 4 seasons.
12-13 30
13-14 31
14-15 32
15-16 33

If we hit on our picks, use our capspace correctly, have our guys (Kyrie and TT WILL) improve, I think we can be very competitive in 14-15, Andy will only be 32. Everyone is assuming this "dropoff" or "shell". Anderson never played better than last year, he is still IMPROVING. Giving Kyrie a very good P&R player is good for his developement. AV has played only 11,000 career minutes. He is a young 29 on the mileage scale.

Let's pretend after 08-09 season OKC had a 29 yr old AV. I would bet a ton if they had a 32 yr old AV right now, they would have beat the Heat in 4 or 5 games--they are getting beat on the boards and are losing the 50-50 balls right now and their P&R D with Perkins in sucks--AV changes that for them. But let's say they traded him and #24 for #7 that year. At #7, Curry went to GS--but would OKC have chosen Curry with Westbrook, Sefalosha and Harden? I doubt it, they would have went big--Jordan Hill would have been the likely pick. 2009 NBA Draft - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia OR they could have kept AV and at #24 nabbed a Taj Gibson. They would have been much better not trading their 30 yr old center and pick in this scenario.

The perception of the "late first" vs the "lottery pick" is much larger than the reality. And in THIS draft, there is a pretty decent chance that #24 ends up a better player than #7. Throwing $18 Million and a very good starting center on top of that is just a bad use of our resources.

 

[DraftPick]

I'm calling it now, based on the trade that went down yesterday, Washington wins the lottery next year :chuckles:

 

[chrisrich91]

Everyone is making this out like it is AV straight up for #7. That is not the case, we are adding 24 AND taking back salary for a player who won't even play for us(beans).

So this is the trade
AV, Q Miller and 18 million
for
Maybe Drummond? Lamb? Waiters?

Really?

What if Drummond is a bust? Great! We get to draft high again next year and the year after! Awesome that we get to waist Kyrie's rookie contract.

AV's age in each of the next 4 seasons.
12-13 30
13-14 31
14-15 32
15-16 33

If we hit on our picks, use our capspace correctly, have our guys (Kyrie and TT WILL) improve, I think we can be very competitive in 14-15, Andy will only be 32. Everyone is assuming this "dropoff" or "shell". Anderson never played better than last year, he is still IMPROVING. Giving Kyrie a very good P&R player is good for his developement. AV has played only 11,000 career minutes. He is a young 29 on the mileage scale.

Let's pretend after 08-09 season OKC had a 29 yr old AV. I would bet a ton if they had a 32 yr old AV right now, they would have beat the Heat in 4 or 5 games--they are getting beat on the boards and are losing the 50-50 balls right now and their P&R D with Perkins in sucks--AV changes that for them. But let's say they traded him and #24 for #7 that year. At #7, Curry went to GS--but would OKC have chosen Curry with Westbrook, Sefalosha and Harden? I doubt it, they would have went big--Jordan Hill would have been the likely pick. 2009 NBA Draft - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia OR they could have kept AV and at #24 nabbed a Taj Gibson. They would have been much better not trading their 30 yr old center and pick in this scenario.

The perception of the "late first" vs the "lottery pick" is much larger than the reality. And in THIS draft, there is a pretty decent chance that #24 ends up a better player than #7. Throwing $18 Million and a very good starting center on top of that is just a bad use of our resources.

Your whole post is based on a piece of flawed logic. Andy has hit his ceiling, and his style of play doesn't lend itself to a long healthy career. His clock is ticking and I can guarantee you that he won't be playing at a starting center level when we're ready to contend.

We're running out of time to get value from him. If the GS rumor is somehow true, that gives us about double the return I expect to get from Andy at this point.

 

[sailfish]

If the ball is in the Cavs court on this deal, I think they haven't accepted it yet because they don't know who will still be there at #7, and that could be the dealbreaker for them. They don't wanna take the deal now, to have Drummond, Barnes, Lamb off the board and have to settle for Rivers or Henson

It would be a shame if the Cavaliers' hesitancy caused the Warriors to find a similar deal with another team. In fact, I have a feeling this is what we may see happen.
I'd love see the team have two lottery picks, but it just seems too good to true.
Maybe the Cavaliers are trying to make the deal with #33 and/or #34 instead of #24? Golden State already has 4 picks in the draft, so I'm not sure they would look to acquire more.

 

[tsteele316]

Your whole post is based on a piece of flawed logic. Andy has hit his ceiling, and his style of play doesn't lend itself to a long healthy career. His clock is ticking and I can guarantee you that he won't be playing at a starting center level when we're ready to contend.

We're running out of time to get value from him. If the GS rumor is somehow true, that gives us about double the return I expect to get from Andy at this point.

seriously. i mean, i can easily say that #24 will bust, AV will get hurt, and he'll end up with zero trade value. then, not pulling the trigger only serves to say dan gilbert a little bit of cash, which, he doesn't give two shits about, so why anyone else would is puzzling.

 

[AvonCavsFan]

Your whole post is based on a piece of flawed logic. Andy has hit his ceiling, and his style of play doesn't lend itself to a long healthy career. His clock is ticking and I can guarantee you that he won't be playing at a starting center level when we're ready to contend.

We're running out of time to get value from him. If the GS rumor is somehow true, that gives us about double the return I expect to get from Andy at this point.

That is funny how MY logic is flawed, when the only facts are that Andy had never played better than last year. He improved from the year before. So because YOU say he hit his ceiling that means he did?!?

Style of play? What you mean smart, high IQ basketball? Andy gets rebounds and 50-50 balls with hustle, yes--but he knows where to be, he is a student of the game (or just intuitive).

I plan on competing before his contract is up--and with him that is more of a reality than without him.

Find me the last all defensive big who averaged a double double and was only 29 yrs old that got traded for just an upgrade in first rounder.

 

[el_capitan]

If the ball is in the Cavs court on this deal, I think they haven't accepted it yet because they don't know who will still be there at #7, and that could be the dealbreaker for them. They don't wanna take the deal now, to have Drummond, Barnes, Lamb off the board and have to settle for Rivers or Henson

I would love to be at 7 with Drummond, Barnes and Lamb off the board because that means one of Beal, MKG or Robinson is still available.

 

[Tornicade]

I would love to be at 7 with Drummond, Barnes and Lamb off the board because that means one of Beal, MKG or Robinson is still available.

it is very very very doubtful that lamb goes in the top six. You certainly dont want make a trade based on the expectation that lilliard or lams are picked in the top 6.

 

[Lumthemad]

Anderson is always under-valued on this board in regards what he brings to our team and his age and injuries are played too far up. I'm in the camp of keeping him UNLESS you see a player on the board you determine as a building block for the very long term. What you'd hate to see happen though is Anderson continuing to have nagging injuries when we NEED him out there.

Bottom line, for us Anderson fans, you will NEVER get what we might think is equal value for him. If the Cavaliers cannot swallow that, you are better off keeping him and rolling the dice on his health.

 

[el_capitan]

it is very very very doubtful that lamb goes in the top six. You certainly dont want make a trade based on the expectation that lilliard or lams are picked in the top 6.

I know he won't be I was just responding to that posters thoughts that we would be screwed if those three were off the board. If his scenario really happened that would be great for us.

 

[Ohio]

I would love to be at 7 with Drummond, Barnes and Lamb off the board because that means one of Beal, MKG or Robinson is still available.

Oh okay, you're right.

Hmm..then we should absolutely take this deal now.

 

[DaNewCavs]

It would be a shame if the Cavaliers' hesitancy caused the Warriors to find a similar deal with another team. In fact, I have a feeling this is what we may see happen.
I'd love see the team have two lottery picks, but it just seems too good to true.
Maybe the Cavaliers are trying to make the deal with #33 and/or #34 instead of #24? Golden State already has 4 picks in the draft, so I'm not sure they would look to acquire more.

Or, maybe if the Cavs don't like what they see at 7, they have another deal in place in the teens that would not include Varejao. If he thinks Drummond is special and he drops to 7, then take the deal for #7. I don't think Grant would pull the trigger at 7, if he sees similar players that in the teens that he can give up less for. If he thinks that Rivers, Ross, Lamb, Waiters, PGIII are all similar and he can get them further down the draft, why should he give up Varejao?

 

[Phills14]

I really like Quincy Miller at the 24 pick and that's my hesitation with the AV to GSW thing. If we could somehow end up with Miller in the back end of the 1st round I'd be all for trading AV and 24 for #7 and baggage.

AV/MKG/Quincy Miller/2 2nd rounders > MKG/Lamb/2 2nd rounders/Biedrins
however; if we can move those 2 2nd rounders into a late 1st I think I can live with this outcome MKG/Lamb/Quincy Miller/Biedrins.

The best scenario would be for either Rivers/Lamb/Ross to slip into the mid teens and we use 24 and a 2nd rounder to get one of those guys while still keeping AV.