What I don't understand is how is Walsh going to ask for more assets in trades for Lee and Nate vs. what he got in the Z-Bo trade. In basically in the same boat, wanting to free cap space for 2010 and other GMs are aware. He already the set the price for his assets. I think teams are willing to call his bluff at this point.

Posted by Pharzeone:

What I don't understand is how is Walsh going to ask for more assets in trades for Lee and Nate vs. what he got in the Z-Bo trade. In basically in the same boat, wanting to free cap space for 2010 and other GMs are aware. He already the set the price for his assets. I think teams are willing to call his bluff at this point.

You're right. It's gonna be tough. I don't have a real good answer for you. It might have to involve practicality and not asking for the moon. For Lee, instead of asking for some gigantic package from say Portland for guys like Aldridge, Bayless, Outlaw etc. just look to deal Lee to a playoff-bound team for a pick - some team that'll be drafting in the 15-20 range. Maybe something with Dallas built around Lee for their pick - that team's pretty good but still comes up short talent-wise against the better clubs out west. Maybe Lee to Oklahoma City - they have a lot of picks. Maybe something with Sacramento - take Miller off their hands and give them Lee, Malik's expiring and request their 1st and 2nd rounders. Sac's always liked Lee. Even if Walsh managed to put something together that made sense, Lee and his agent could always come out and refuse to sign with that team like they've done before so that problem could very well resurface...

Same scenario for Nate & Duhon. You'd figure Orlando could be a realistic option for either Nate or Duhon or both. Gimmie a package built around their 1st rounder and maybe a future pick. In theory, you'd want more but assets are assets. We might be able to turn them into gold and save some important cap room in the process. You shoot for the moon of course but be prepared to get what you can get. Bottom line is I might wanna scrap the whole Lee/Nate/Duhon thing. We pay those guys big money, we might really be forfeiting our chances of improving this team and getting it to the level we want it to be at. Right now with Lee/Nate/Duhon all playing well, maybe even exceeding expectations somewhat, we're still a 30 win club. If Walsh is smart IMO, he tries to replace these guys through the draft - and you don't even need to trade for lottery picks to get that done. That's why I think it's possible.

Something tells me Walsh isn't thinking of making any trades along these lines anyway so I don't even know why I bother anymore... Anyone see the clip of him talking tonight on the telecast? He's very cryptic with a great poker face - you really don't know what the hell he's thinking. He's still talking about improving the current team as long as it doesn't hurt his 2010 chances. Meanwhile, I'd argue that that's not the matter at hand. Who cares about this season? I mean, does he really believe that or is he just saying the right things publicly to the season ticket-holders and his owner? It's a hard thing to do for me as a fan - routing against my team, esp. watching this nailbiter tonight with SA, but ultimately I really believe any trades made to improve our chances this year should not be the focus at all.


[Edited by - finestrg on 02-17-2009 10:13 PM]

Posted by Rookie:

IT'S A BUYERS MARKET!!!! GO DONNIE GO!!!!

Simply put, exactly!

Posted by PresIke:

Posted by martin:

Posted by Rookie:

Posted by PresIke:

you think so man?

Add Lebron or Wade to our team and we suck?

I think we'd be a top team in the East.

If we Have Bosh, Amare or Joe Johnson we'd at least be a playoff team.

We could sign someone like Nash as a FA as well, on the cheap.

Why would any of those guys want to give up max dollars playing on good teams to come here and play with our group of underachievers?

Who is LeBron gonna play with in CLE in 2 years? Ben Wallace, Big Z and curly hair dude? Hickson? Mo Williams? Delonte West? Those guys are barn burners by themselves.

Lots of stuff still in play.

yeah, i don't see anyone close to resembling a super-star on our team. the cavs do not have a roster full of "talent" any better than we have, i'd suggest as well.

add lebron to our team and we'd be MUCH better.

You's know actually all this talk of Lebron signing early in Cleve It To Beaver makes me think they'll have to break the bank in this bad economic situation. Poor, poor Cleve.

But wait! What's that I hear in the distance? What?...................over here. over here. over hear you can make more..................

Posted by Finestrg:

Posted by Pharzeone:

What I don't understand is how is Walsh going to ask for more assets in trades for Lee and Nate vs. what he got in the Z-Bo trade. In basically in the same boat, wanting to free cap space for 2010 and other GMs are aware. He already the set the price for his assets. I think teams are willing to call his bluff at this point.

You're right. It's gonna be tough. I don't have a real good answer for you. It might have to involve practicality and not asking for the moon. For Lee, instead of asking for some gigantic package from say Portland for guys like Aldridge, Bayless, Outlaw etc. just look to deal Lee to a playoff-bound team for a pick - some team that'll be drafting in the 15-20 range. Maybe something with Dallas built around Lee for their pick - that team's pretty good but still comes up short talent-wise against the better clubs out west. Maybe Lee to Oklahoma City - they have a lot of picks. Maybe something with Sacramento - take Miller off their hands and give them Lee, Malik's expiring and request their 1st and 2nd rounders. Sac's always liked Lee. Even if Walsh managed to put something together that made sense, Lee and his agent could always come out and refuse to sign with that team like they've done before so that problem could very well resurface...

Same scenario for Nate & Duhon. You'd figure Orlando could be a realistic option for either Nate or Duhon or both. Gimmie a package built around their 1st rounder and maybe a future pick. In theory, you'd want more but assets are assets. We might be able to turn them into gold and save some important cap room in the process. You shoot for the moon of course but be prepared to get what you can get. Bottom line is I might wanna scrap the whole Lee/Nate/Duhon thing. We pay those guys big money, we might really be forfeiting our chances of improving this team and getting it to the level we want it to be at. Right now with Lee/Nate/Duhon all playing well, maybe even exceeding expectations somewhat, we're still a 30 win club. If Walsh is smart IMO, he tries to replace these guys through the draft - and you don't even need to trade for lottery picks to get that done. That's why I think it's possible.

Something tells me Walsh isn't thinking of making any trades along these lines anyway so I don't even know why I bother anymore... Anyone see the clip of him talking tonight on the telecast? He's very cryptic with a great poker face - you really don't know what the hell he's thinking. He's still talking about improving the current team as long as it doesn't hurt his 2010 chances. Meanwhile, I'd argue that that's not the matter at hand. Who cares about this season? I mean, does he really believe that or is he just saying the right things publicly to the season ticket-holders and his owner? It's a hard thing to do for me as a fan - routing against my team, esp. watching this nailbiter tonight with SA, but ultimately I really believe any trades made to improve our chances this year should not be the focus at all.


[Edited by - finestrg on 02-17-2009 10:13 PM]

Man I tell ya, maybe Nate's a keeper. Last game in LA against the Clippers and now tonight. What did he put up tonight against SA - 32 and 10 rebounds. Jezzz... Optimum cap room is important but the little fella, he's special. I've always said, even during his slump, that he's something else. Very good player that could actually help us attract a FA in 2010. That's what I believe. Keep Nate - replace Lee and Duhon. I'd have a hard time committing $15+ million to keeping those two. Nate on the other hand - might have to keep him.