Archive

Cavaliers trade rumors

  • hoops23
    Per BW:
    The Cavs are targeting several players believed to be on the trade market. Multiple sources said the team has been in touch about the following:

    • Anthony Randolph, Warriors: The young, tall and talented Randolph has been an enigma. He's had some excellent games but has had steady run-ins with Warriors coach Don Nelson and his playing time has varied. Is he being held back because of his immaturity or because Nelson hasn't managed him as well as he could? There are differing opinions.

    One thing that is sure, says a source, is the Cavs' interest in giving it a try. This week rumors emerged that the Warriors would be willing to trade Randolph and the Cavs have announced their interest. Cavs coach Mike Brown fell in love with Randolph before his rookie season after draft workouts and seeing him at summer league.

    The Cavs and Golden State have already had extensive trade talks this year, for Jackson, and things could re-kindle in a package around Randolph.

    • Troy Murphy, Pacers: According to multiple sources, there's an interest from both parties for the prototypical stretch forward. Murphy hasn't been on the best terms with the Pacers, who are losing lots of money and still owe Murphy $12 million next year. Murphy is averaging 13 points and nine rebounds this season and the 6-11 big man is a career 40 percent 3-point shooter. Those are good numbers but perhaps not enough for the Pacers, who have a losing record and a $65 million payroll.
    The downside to Murphy is that he's not a good defender. But he would fit well on the floor with Anderson Varejao or Shaquille O'Neal because of his ability to hit the outside jumper. Plus he's an excellent pick-and-pop player, which makes him a good match to play with James and Mo Williams in halfcourt situations.

    Murphy may not be the Cavs' first choice, but he's probably going to be one of the best players available and it is something the team is already studying.

    • Antawn Jamison, Wizards: Right now Washington, says a league executive, is not ready to do anything with its roster despite a poor start. One of the reasons is that because of injuries, the Wizards are without key off-season addition Mike Miller. But there's another factor at play that may decide what happens with the Wizards' future.

    Team owner Abe Pollin's death was a huge blow to the franchise. Washington Capitals owner Ted Leonsis, whose company owns 44 percent of the Wizards and the Verizon Center, has the right to buy the rest of the team and the arena. Leonsis has said he intends to do just that.

    The question is when Leonsis will finalize the purchase and just what changes he'd want to make. With an $80 million payroll, a losing record and new management, the Wizards could be ripe for cost-cutting and rebuilding. Jamison is having a great year, but has $28 million and two years left on his contract after this season. If the Wizards get to the point where they have to make a move, trading Jamison for expiring contracts could get them around $10 million under the salary cap next summer.

    The Cavs have made trade proposals in the past for Jamison and will do so again. If Jamison is ever traded, expect the Cavs to push hard to be the team. He fits in nearly perfectly with the type of player the Cavs want both on the floor and off. Like Murphy, he's not a great defender. But unlike Murphy, Jamison can create his own shot offensively.

    There will certainly be more names that emerge between now and February. But trust that these three will remain at the front of the Cavs' thoughts as they see how things unfold.
    http://www.cleveland.com/cavs/index.ssf/2009/12/with_gms_beginning_to_assess_r.html

    Some interesting names on this list..
  • sportswizuhrd
    I would def love getting Troy Murphy. I have been wanting them to get him for a while now. I would say that a trade for any of these guys would involve Hickson and I for one am ok with that.
  • Lovejoy1984
    Out of those 3 wouldn't mind Jamison.

    But wouldn't be mad with Anthony Randolph, for the right package of course, wouldn't want to give up to much for him.
  • hoops23
    I'm not sure who else would be paired with JJ Hickson in order to pull off a trade...
  • 2kool4skool
    LTrain23 wrote: I'm not sure who else would be paired with JJ Hickson in order to pull off a trade...
    I'd be fine with getting rid of Shaq with Hickson if it meant getting an all-star caliber player. He's a big expiring contract that could be attractive to a lot of teams.

    Although I'm unsure if Shaq has a no-trade policy, I'd guess he does.
  • Trueblue23
    2kool4skool wrote:
    LTrain23 wrote: I'm not sure who else would be paired with JJ Hickson in order to pull off a trade...
    I'd be fine with getting rid of Shaq with Hickson if it meant getting an all-star caliber player. He's a big expiring contract that could be attractive to a lot of teams.

    Although I'm unsure if Shaq has a no-trade policy, I'd guess he does.
    No, Shaq doesn't. 4 years of service to the current team is one of the requirements to get a no-trade-clause. I think Kobe is the only player in the league with that stipulation right now.
  • 2kool4skool
    Trueblue23 wrote:
    2kool4skool wrote:
    LTrain23 wrote: I'm not sure who else would be paired with JJ Hickson in order to pull off a trade...
    I'd be fine with getting rid of Shaq with Hickson if it meant getting an all-star caliber player. He's a big expiring contract that could be attractive to a lot of teams.

    Although I'm unsure if Shaq has a no-trade policy, I'd guess he does.
    No, Shaq doesn't. 4 years of service to the current team is one of the requirements to get a no-trade-clause. I think Kobe is the only player in the league with that stipulation right now.
    Thanks, was completely unaware of that, assumed it was just something that could be written into a contract. I just remembered Andy having one so assumed Shaq would.

    So with that info, I'm completely in favor of trading away Shaq with Hickson if it could grab the Cavs an all-star caliber player(Jamison would qualify.)
  • Trueblue23
    2kool4skool wrote:
    Trueblue23 wrote:
    2kool4skool wrote:
    LTrain23 wrote: I'm not sure who else would be paired with JJ Hickson in order to pull off a trade...
    I'd be fine with getting rid of Shaq with Hickson if it meant getting an all-star caliber player. He's a big expiring contract that could be attractive to a lot of teams.

    Although I'm unsure if Shaq has a no-trade policy, I'd guess he does.
    No, Shaq doesn't. 4 years of service to the current team is one of the requirements to get a no-trade-clause. I think Kobe is the only player in the league with that stipulation right now.
    Thanks, was completely unaware of that, assumed it was just something that could be written into a contract. I just remembered Andy having one so assumed Shaq would.

    So with that info, I'm completely in favor of trading away Shaq with Hickson if it could grab the Cavs an all-star caliber player(Jamison would qualify.)
    Well TECHNICALLY Anderson V. didn't have a "no trade clause", the Cavs weren't allowed by the NBA to trade him because they matched a contract on an offer sheet.. Basically if you are a restricted FA who attempts to leave, your original team can match any offer but once they sign you, they aren't allowed to trade you for one year.
  • 2kool4skool
    Trueblue23 wrote:
    2kool4skool wrote:
    Trueblue23 wrote:
    2kool4skool wrote:
    LTrain23 wrote: I'm not sure who else would be paired with JJ Hickson in order to pull off a trade...
    I'd be fine with getting rid of Shaq with Hickson if it meant getting an all-star caliber player. He's a big expiring contract that could be attractive to a lot of teams.

    Although I'm unsure if Shaq has a no-trade policy, I'd guess he does.
    No, Shaq doesn't. 4 years of service to the current team is one of the requirements to get a no-trade-clause. I think Kobe is the only player in the league with that stipulation right now.
    Thanks, was completely unaware of that, assumed it was just something that could be written into a contract. I just remembered Andy having one so assumed Shaq would.

    So with that info, I'm completely in favor of trading away Shaq with Hickson if it could grab the Cavs an all-star caliber player(Jamison would qualify.)
    Well TECHNICALLY Anderson V. didn't have a "no trade clause", the Cavs weren't allowed by the NBA to trade him because they matched a contract on an offer sheet.. Basically if you are a restricted FA who attempts to leave, your original team can match any offer but once they sign you, they aren't allowed to trade you for one year.
    They could trade him, he just had to approve it during that 1st year right? I remember a story about how he refused a trade to Milwaukee so a deal for Michael Redd was dead, not to say the media couldn't have gotten that wrong.
  • Trueblue23
    2kool4skool wrote:
    Trueblue23 wrote:
    2kool4skool wrote:
    Trueblue23 wrote:
    2kool4skool wrote:
    LTrain23 wrote: I'm not sure who else would be paired with JJ Hickson in order to pull off a trade...
    I'd be fine with getting rid of Shaq with Hickson if it meant getting an all-star caliber player. He's a big expiring contract that could be attractive to a lot of teams.

    Although I'm unsure if Shaq has a no-trade policy, I'd guess he does.
    No, Shaq doesn't. 4 years of service to the current team is one of the requirements to get a no-trade-clause. I think Kobe is the only player in the league with that stipulation right now.
    Thanks, was completely unaware of that, assumed it was just something that could be written into a contract. I just remembered Andy having one so assumed Shaq would.

    So with that info, I'm completely in favor of trading away Shaq with Hickson if it could grab the Cavs an all-star caliber player(Jamison would qualify.)
    Well TECHNICALLY Anderson V. didn't have a "no trade clause", the Cavs weren't allowed by the NBA to trade him because they matched a contract on an offer sheet.. Basically if you are a restricted FA who attempts to leave, your original team can match any offer but once they sign you, they aren't allowed to trade you for one year.
    They could trade him, he just had to approve it during that 1st year right? I remember a story about how he refused a trade to Milwaukee so a deal for Michael Redd was dead, not to say the media couldn't have gotten that wrong.
    Yes he could approve the trade.. I guess when I think "no trade clause" i think of the kind in Kobe's contract, the same thing MJ had. I don't think there are any other players in the NBA that have that right now..
  • Sage
    Randolph Randolph Randolph
  • hoops23
    2kool4skool wrote:
    Trueblue23 wrote:
    2kool4skool wrote:
    LTrain23 wrote: I'm not sure who else would be paired with JJ Hickson in order to pull off a trade...
    I'd be fine with getting rid of Shaq with Hickson if it meant getting an all-star caliber player. He's a big expiring contract that could be attractive to a lot of teams.

    Although I'm unsure if Shaq has a no-trade policy, I'd guess he does.
    No, Shaq doesn't. 4 years of service to the current team is one of the requirements to get a no-trade-clause. I think Kobe is the only player in the league with that stipulation right now.
    Thanks, was completely unaware of that, assumed it was just something that could be written into a contract. I just remembered Andy having one so assumed Shaq would.

    So with that info, I'm completely in favor of trading away Shaq with Hickson if it could grab the Cavs an all-star caliber player(Jamison would qualify.)
    Uh-huh, and if we do happen to play Orlando in the post season, who exactly would guard Dwight? Z? LMAO! Jamison? Nah.. Andy? Again, L-O-L...

    We need Shaq. He's steadily improving and I don't care how much he scores, because his rebounding and stature are the real reason we got him.. He's also a great passer from the post, so no, we need to hang onto him..

    I'm thinking JJ and a S&T with Wally..
  • Trueblue23
    ^^ Agreed. Shaq was brought in for ONE reason.. stopping Dwight Howard. It would be pointless to get rid of him right now.
  • 2kool4skool
    LTrain23 wrote:Uh-huh, and if we do happen to play Orlando in the post season, who exactly would guard Dwight? Z? LMAO! Jamison? Nah.. Andy? Again, L-O-L...

    We need Shaq. He's steadily improving and I don't care how much he scores, because his rebounding and stature are the real reason we got him.. He's also a great passer from the post, so no, we need to hang onto him..

    I'm thinking JJ and a S&T with Wally..
    Great, Cleveland may or may not beat Orlando if we play them, then lose to Boston when the hamburgler has to defend the pick n roll.
  • thedynasty1998
    Even if the Cavs acquire any of those three, they still are not as good as the Lakers.
  • pkebker
    This doesn't really sound like trade rumors, more like a wish list. The rumors need to include actual players that would be included in the trade. I would especially like to have Jamison though.
  • sleeper
    Hate to say it, but Z is a big trading piece so if something goes does expect his name to be tossed into the fray. The good part is he is terrible, so likely a buyout could happen and he could re-sign with the Cavs to retire there.
  • burt07
    pkebker wrote: This doesn't really sound like trade rumors, more like a wish list. The rumors need to include actual players that would be included in the trade. I would especially like to have Jamison though.
    Why would they be a wish list. It's coming from Brian Windhorst, who will never claim anything unless it has some substance behind it. And I would say he has the connections to know what's going on most of the time.

    As for the players, getting Randolph would be pretty amazing as it would set in a player for the future with LeBron. Obviously he hasn't established himself quite yet as a centerpiece player but neither has someone like Hickson. I'd be all for getting someone like him. Next would probably be Jamison, as I like what he brings to the table talent-wise, don't like what he brings to the table contract-wise. Lastly I would go with Murphy. I saw him in person during the Cavs-Pacers game last month and he definitely looked a little off. Now, it was his first game coming off an injury so obviously that plays a factor but the injury risk definitely plays a factor, just as it has to for Jamison.
  • SQ_Crazies
    No way they're trading Shaq unless it's for Chris Bosh. Period. Might as well throw the idea out.

    Like TB said, he was brought here for one reason and that's Dwight Howard--and we saw when they matched up earlier this year that it was effective. Regardless of how anyone thinks Shaq is playing right now, there is no way you can say getting him was a dumb move--he was brought here for the playoffs and you'll have to wait until then to judge him. And he wasn't brought here to dominate either--just get Howard in foul trouble. I have a weird feeling that their play has been due to that same line of thinking--I'm not sure this team has any regular season goals other than making the playoffs to be completely honest. There is no way they're going to make another push for homecourt--they shouldn't either IMO. But trading Shaq for anyone on that list would be stupid and isn't going to happen.
  • Trueblue23
    SQ_Crazies wrote: No way they're trading Shaq unless it's for Chris Bosh. Period. Might as well throw the idea out.

    Like TB said, he was brought here for one reason and that's Dwight Howard--and we saw when they matched up earlier this year that it was effective. Regardless of how anyone thinks Shaq is playing right now, there is no way you can say getting him was a dumb move--he was brought here for the playoffs and you'll have to wait until then to judge him. And he wasn't brought here to dominate either--just get Howard in foul trouble. I have a weird feeling that their play has been due to that same line of thinking--I'm not sure this team has any regular season goals other than making the playoffs to be completely honest. There is no way they're going to make another push for homecourt--they shouldn't either IMO. But trading Shaq for anyone on that list would be stupid and isn't going to happen.
    Shaq will be the first one to say that regular season doesn't matter. He is known for using the season as a way to play himself into shape for the playoffs... I still think the Cavs will win 57-60 games, simply because of LeBron. Look at the results from the Lakers 3peat years..
    2000- 67-15
    2001- 56-26
    2002- 58-24
  • Mulva
    Randolph has incredible talent, but he's too inconsistent for my taste.

    Antawn would be a good get and Murphy is intriguing too. He has a unique skill set for a big guy.
  • hoops23
    I'd love Jamison simply because he can create for himself as well, but his contract is ugly..

    Then Randolph, because he's a freak...

    Then Murphy. While he can score, isn't really a guy that can create for himself, which isn't terrible, but come clutch time, we'll another big man who can get his own.
  • h2thaizzo
    Jamison's contract doesn't worry me a lot, only because we are already screwed when it comes to cap space. We are a win now team, with LeBron to resign, Shaq possibly to resign, etc. Thank god the NBA when it comes to the cap, allows teams to exceed the number to sign its own players, because we would be screwed if it were not that way. Our only chance of adding a big name to this team now is via trade. Jamison is a complete player, good shooter, scorer, rebounder, etc. Randolph is a freak, and has a tremendous upside. He can run the floor, which is something we really don't have much of when it comes to our bigs. When it comes to Murphy, he gets his points by rebounds and off the ball shots. Thats perfect for what we have here, because with LeBron and Mo running the show, Murphy is likely to only get the ball long enough to take a shot. He is a mismatch every time he is on the floor, especially when in the game along LeBron. He is a SG in a PF body, that is one of the better rebounders in the league, along with being one of the better shooters. His knock is he isn't a good defender, but I am adamant in the fact that if you have the ability to score more points than your opponent, you don't have to worry about playing lockdown defense at every position.
  • jpake1
    Murphy is their best bet IMO. Maybe ship Z and JJ out for him and another piece. Maybe a 3 team trade to get things going. Pacers could buy Z out and he could return. I believe they definitely need moves. I just don't think there is any move out there that gets them a ring.
  • devil1197
    Another option could be David West from NO.