NBA Free Agency

[Silver Surfer]

Boozer to Lakers is very very odd.

He's the anti-Dirk. I lost all respect for him after he lied to the Cavaliers in 2004 and betrayed their trust:

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=1848196

http://www.nba.com/cavaliers/news/gund_boozer_040714.html

 

[jterrell]

He's the anti-Dirk. I lost all respect for him after he lied to the Cavaliers in 2004 and betrayed their trust:

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=1848196

http://www.nba.com/cavaliers/news/gund_boozer_040714.html

He's an odd duck for sure but beyond that why would the Lakers want an aging, untradeable PF?

 

[jterrell]

Just read a surprisingly good article on Bleacher Report talking about trading Wiggens for Love. It said how Irving is one of the worst perimeter defenders in the NBA and Love is one of the worst rim protectors. You can cover up one bad defender, or even two, but not if they don't complement each other. If you have an awful perimeter defender, you can't also have an awful rim protector. It also said how two of the other 5 worst rim protectors in the NBA are Tristan Thompson and Anderson Varajeo. Their defense would be historically bad outside of LeBron. I don't know if they could overcome that. It's hard to score in the playoffs so you can't win a title giving up 110 points a game. They'd be better off keeping Wiggens and using that extra money (since he's on a cheap rookie contract) to sign some veteran rim protectors.

Again, the problem here is two-fold.
1) bro, don't ever read bleacher report.
2) the cavs are very unlikely to exist come trade deadline as they do today.

Love is not a rim protector but he is one of the league's best rebounders.

CLE can obviously trade guys and sign guys and re-work that roster pretty severely if they so desire.
A guy similar to Blatche could end up there helping on big man defense.

What is clear is that if they find holes they have plenty of time and ammunition to fill them.
They have picks they can ship out to any teams that fall behind the curve early.
They've got young, coveted players they can move.

Kyrie Irving can play defense. LeBron and the new coach will make sure he does. Or he becomes a prime trade chip for someone like Rondo that will.

If they acquire Love they immediately become the most talented team in the East.
That doesn't mean best because you do have to fit them into roles and play actual basketball but they have more assets than about anyone to fill out the team and need mere role players around those 3 guys.

Also you will be surprised to see how hard guy can play when it comes to protecting a roster spot on a possible NBA title winner.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

The 1957-1974 Boston Celtics disagree. Matter of fact, go up to 1976.

No kidding. I mean, it's been a nice run for them but I would not say it's the best. Really not even close IMO to the Celtics dynasty you mention.

I'm not a fan either but I don't hate them and look to discredit what they've done.

Even though I have no allegiance to that team I admire them. They built something special down there in San Antonio.

I agree with this.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Boozer was cheap, he's only costing 3.25 Million. He's a one year deal that comes off the books in 2015 is the Lakers decide not to extend him. If all he is is a back up, that's cheap.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Looks like the Cavs are in. ESPN reporting that they are now willing to trade Wiggins as part of the deal to get Love.


http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/1...iggins-deal-kevin-love-minnesota-timberwolves

 

[jterrell]

Boozer was cheap, he's only costing 3.25 Million. He's a one year deal that comes off the books in 2015 is the Lakers decide not to extend him. If all he is is a back up, that's cheap.

It's not about money but about why?
Why would the Lakers want him for that one year??
They are a bad, bad team by West standards.
They really are better off finishing 12th than 9th or 10th.

I could see him as an asset but he isn't tradable.

There is a reason people kept projecting him to other teams.
No one expected the Lakers wanted him.

It is just odd.
They had to give up rights to marshon brooks and a couple other young guys to make the bid on a 32 year old.
The only 30 year olds were Nash (40) and Kobe (35).
It is a very young team really.

Could see if they badly needed the body just to field a team but Jordan Hill is a decent young big that needs lots of court time to fully develop and Randle should also be force fed minutes.

--pulled from a message on an nba board....
At the price the Lakers are getting Boozer for, it feels wrong to criticize. But does adding Carlos Boozer make Los Angeles contenders? No. Does it gum up an already crowded frontcourt that should be dedicated playing time to its promising beast of a rookie? Yes. And will the Lakers have a completely random rotation next season with Jeremy Lin, Steve Nash, Kobe, Nick Young, Robert Sacre, Ryan Kelly, Ed Davis, Jordan Hill and Kendall Marshall all on the roster? Yes. Yes the will.

To make matters worse, Boozer actually makes the Lakers a little bit better. Why is this a bad thing? Because Los Angeles either needs to get back to the playoffs to appease their fans after striking out in free agency for the second year in a row…or they need to be a bottom-five team. If the Lakers are in the top five of the lottery, they get to keep their 2015 first rounder.

 

[jterrell]

Looks like the Cavs are in. ESPN reporting that they are now willing to trade Wiggins as part of the deal to get Love.


http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/1...iggins-deal-kevin-love-minnesota-timberwolves

which makes complete sense and was always likely to happen.
as good as wiggins is for a prospect he is 5 or 6 years away from playing consistently like an all star much less all pro.

CLE was right to try not to include him but not to keep him, merely to use him in another deal after they get Love.
If GSW is now willing to move Thompson the Cavs had to respond with Wiggins.

Wiggins, Randolph OR Thompson and a 1st should get the deal done easily. If you have to give up both Wiggins and Thompson you try to make that a 2nd.

As good as Love is the leverage is minimal for Minny as he can decide where he'll extend at.
Right now GSW and CLE are very much in a battle but once one team opts out the other is all they have before offers get meager.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

It's not about money but about why?
Why would the Lakers want him for that one year??
They are a bad, bad team by West standards.
They really are better off finishing 12th than 9th or 10th.

I could see him as an asset but he isn't tradable.

There is a reason people kept projecting him to other teams.
No one expected the Lakers wanted him.

It is just odd.
They had to give up rights to marshon brooks and a couple other young guys to make the bid on a 32 year old.
The only 30 year olds were Nash (40) and Kobe (35).
It is a very young team really.

Could see if they badly needed the body just to field a team but Jordan Hill is a decent young big that needs lots of court time to fully develop and Randle should also be force fed minutes.

--pulled from a message on an nba board....
At the price the Lakers are getting Boozer for, it feels wrong to criticize. But does adding Carlos Boozer make Los Angeles contenders? No. Does it gum up an already crowded frontcourt that should be dedicated playing time to its promising beast of a rookie? Yes. And will the Lakers have a completely random rotation next season with Jeremy Lin, Steve Nash, Kobe, Nick Young, Robert Sacre, Ryan Kelly, Ed Davis, Jordan Hill and Kendall Marshall all on the roster? Yes. Yes the will.

To make matters worse, Boozer actually makes the Lakers a little bit better. Why is this a bad thing? Because Los Angeles either needs to get back to the playoffs to appease their fans after striking out in free agency for the second year in a row…or they need to be a bottom-five team. If the Lakers are in the top five of the lottery, they get to keep their 2015 first rounder.

I think it depends on what role they have in mind for him. I mean, if he's a guy you intend to bring in off the bench to spell some of your starters, then he's probably a good fit. If you get 20 good minutes out of him a contest, then he's worth the investment. If he takes early retirement on the bench, then he won't be but still, you have little invested in it. Depending on what you think of Boozer, he might be a nice vet guy to come in and help develop Randle. I can see a lot of angles here.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

which makes complete sense and was always likely to happen.
as good as wiggins is for a prospect he is 5 or 6 years away from playing consistently like an all star much less all pro.

CLE was right to try not to include him but not to keep him, merely to use him in another deal after they get Love.
If GSW is now willing to move Thompson the Cavs had to respond with Wiggins.

Wiggins, Randolph OR Thompson and a 1st should get the deal done easily. If you have to give up both Wiggins and Thompson you try to make that a 2nd.

As good as Love is the leverage is minimal for Minny as he can decide where he'll extend at.
Right now GSW and CLE are very much in a battle but once one team opts out the other is all they have before offers get meager.

I agree. Wiggins could be the next Michael or Kobe type player but he might not be as well. Either way, he's going to take some time. Right now, you probably have 4 really strong years out of James before he starts to decline. You also are looking at the 2 year contract James has and if you are Cleveland, the trick to getting him to re-up is to give him the best chance to win now in those 4 years or so. Love does that, Wiggins probably doesn't. If you kept Wiggins or didn't make this move, you probably hurt your chances to resign James, long term.

 

[DFWJC]

Now it sounds like the Cavs are willing to part both of their last two #1 picks: Andrew Wiggins and Anthony Bennett.

The TWolves have to take this. They may lose Love anyway, so get off the hook on a monster contract (or eventually losing the player for nothing)and be able to land Wiggins and Bennett....go for it.

 

[zrinkill]

spurs homers starting to get defensive; I guess their stupidity is becoming apparent even to them. Which is saying a lot.

When you make someone resort to this type of trolling ...... you know you have won.

 

[MC KAos]

off season awards for me
biggest offseason winner: Cavs
biggest loser: Lakers
lowest floor/highest ceiling: mavs, they could be in the conference championship series if they stay healthy and play to their potential, or just be old and miss the playoffs, its all in play.

 

[RonSpringsdaman20]

Now it sounds like the Cavs are willing to part both of their last two #1 picks: Andrew Wiggins and Anthony Bennett.

The TWolves have to take this. They may lose Love anyway, so get off the hook on a monster contract (or eventually losing the player for nothing)and be able to land Wiggins and Bennett....go for it.

Benett is not very good. His game is stuck in between. No post game, inefficient jumper. Can't defend fours, too short, can't defend threes not quick enough... The best part of his game is the dribble drive, but if you can't stick the jumper, folks are just gonna play off of you.....
If I'm Cleveland I ask for Tristen or Dion, along with Wiggins.

 

[RonSpringsdaman20]

He's an odd duck for sure but beyond that why would the Lakers want an aging, untradeable PF?

It's one year, and they are responsible for such a small part of his salary, I would think its just to win some games to keep the fans at bay. He still has a 15ft jumper, and can score around the hoop..... At least he can help Randle a bit (just not on defense)....

 

[Manwiththeplan]

which makes complete sense and was always likely to happen.
as good as wiggins is for a prospect he is 5 or 6 years away from playing consistently like an all star much less all pro.

CLE was right to try not to include him but not to keep him, merely to use him in another deal after they get Love.
If GSW is now willing to move Thompson the Cavs had to respond with Wiggins.

Wiggins, Randolph OR Thompson and a 1st should get the deal done easily. If you have to give up both Wiggins and Thompson you try to make that a 2nd.

As good as Love is the leverage is minimal for Minny as he can decide where he'll extend at.
Right now GSW and CLE are very much in a battle but once one team opts out the other is all they have before offers get meager.

Once Cleveland decided to include Wiggins, no other team will be able to beat their offer, so I wouldn't include Thompson if I were them. Wiggins, Bennett +1st rounder should get the deal done. I'd even push for a Waiters + LaVine swap.

 

[MC KAos]

Once Cleveland decided to include Wiggins, no other team will be able to beat their offer, so I wouldn't include Thompson if I were them. Wiggins, Bennett +1st rounder should get the deal done. I'd even push for a Waiters + LaVine swap.

Question is, who will Cleveland include to make the contracts work? Because they can't take in more money than they are giving up since they are right on the cap

 

[Manwiththeplan]

Question is, who will Cleveland include to make the contracts work? Because they can't take in more money than they are giving up since they are right on the cap

You can take a certain percentage more, 150% +100k I believe, and Love + Lavine ends up being $17,774,903 and Waiters + Bennett + Wiggins (hasn't signed yet) equals about $14,125,920, so it should work.

 

[RonSpringsdaman20]

You can take a certain percentage more, 150% +100k I believe, and Love + Lavine ends up being $17,774,903 and Waiters + Bennett + Wiggins (hasn't signed yet) equals about $14,125,920, so it should work.

You can bet Minny isn't losing any worthwhile young talent in this trade ... Lavine will not be traded. Expect a few vets to be apart of this trade I wouldn't be surprised if Minny pushes J.J. Berrera's contract out the door... if I"m Cleveland, I try to get Corey Brewer. Another defensive wing who can hit the corner three.

 

[MC KAos]

You can take a certain percentage more, 150% +100k I believe, and Love + Lavine ends up being $17,774,903 and Waiters + Bennett + Wiggins (hasn't signed yet) equals about $14,125,920, so it should work.

Wow, didn't think waiters made that much