Bill Simmons idea: JO+our two 2012 first round picks for Verajao

[Cman]

So I posted the question on the Cavaliers blog 'fearthesword'.

They aren't very receptive to the trade, but they seem to be missing the point...
Take a look for yourselves:

http://www.fearthesword.com/2012/2/4/2771228/bill-simmons-proposed-trade-with-cetlics-verajao-for-two-2012-first

I'm a fan of the trade idea, and I like that you solicited opinions from the Cavs, but I can completely understand why they are not interested in the deal:
(1) They like Varejao
(2) The Cavs already have 2 first rounders...

[LooseCannon]

If the Cavs wanted to trade Varejao, they could probably get more by waiting until the off-season.

Maybe if you offered them Brandon Bass in a sign-and-trade alongside those first round picks, you might have something they would be willing to tweak.

[chambers]

So I posted the question on the Cavaliers blog 'fearthesword'.

They aren't very receptive to the trade, but they seem to be missing the point...
Take a look for yourselves:

http://www.fearthesword.com/2012/2/4/2771228/bill-simmons-proposed-trade-with-cetlics-verajao-for-two-2012-first

I'm a fan of the trade idea, and I like that you solicited opinions from the Cavs, but I can completely understand why they are not interested in the deal:
(1) They like Varejao
(2) The Cavs already have 2 first rounders...

They have two first rounders. They could have four, and one of those would now become a top 3 pick once Verajao leaves.
As I said to the Cavs fans on their blog.
Do they really expect to compete against Miami, Chicago, Philly, Indiana, Memphis, OKC, LAC for the next 5 years with a core of Irving, Verajao and a # 10 pick?
They move Verajao and they go straight to the lottery elite.
Whether or not it would be for our deal, it doesn't matter- they would be better off in the long run without him.

[dtrader]

So I posted the question on the Cavaliers blog 'fearthesword'.

They aren't very receptive to the trade, but they seem to be missing the point...
Take a look for yourselves:

http://www.fearthesword.com/2012/2/4/2771228/bill-simmons-proposed-trade-with-cetlics-verajao-for-two-2012-first

I'm a fan of the trade idea, and I like that you solicited opinions from the Cavs, but I can completely understand why they are not interested in the deal:
(1) They like Varejao
(2) The Cavs already have 2 first rounders...

They have two first rounders. They could have four, and one of those would now become a top 3 pick once Verajao leaves.
As I said to the Cavs fans on their blog.
Do they really expect to compete against Miami, Chicago, Philly, Indiana, Memphis, OKC, LAC for the next 5 years with a core of Irving, Verajao and a # 10 pick?
They move Verajao and they go straight to the lottery elite.
Whether or not it would be for our deal, it doesn't matter- they would be better off in the long run without him.

I'd say they're understanding the deal perfectly.  Theyre just looking at whats tangible, and youre offering them "what ifs".  Your whole argument, is based on the loss of Varejao sending them into a top 5 pick in the lottery. Thats not guaranteed at all.  The team could overperform, and still end up in exactly the same spot, with say picks 18 and 22 to show for varejaos loss.  That'd be terrible.  Or they could lose a bunch of games, and have bad luck in the lottery, and still end up with a pick outside the top 10.

Right now they have a young defensive plaer of the year caliber PF locked up on an affordable deal, and 2 draft picks of their own.  With a year of irving developing, a good replacement for Jamison, and some luck in the draft, they could already improve a lot.

[KGs Knee]

Honestly, I'm torn on this trade idea.

On one hand, I really like Varejao as a player.  He would absolutely be an improvement over JO.  Amazing offensive rebounder, husltles, and good defensive player.

The problem I would have is the salary he is paid.  He is scheduled to make 8m next season and 9m the year after.  Basically he would be getting roughly the same (slightly more actually) money that Danny was unwilling to pay Perk.  This just doesn't make sense to me.  If we were unwilling to pay Perk, why would we pay Varejao?  I'd have rather just kept Perk, who I feel is slightly better overall.

I know, past failed trades shouldn't be reason to not make future trades, but that is exactly what making this move would be.  An admission by Ainge the Perk trade was a bust.



By the way, sorry to make this about Perk.  I just had to point out the irony.

[birdbrady]

Honestly, I'm torn on this trade idea.

On one hand, I really like Varejao as a player.  He would absolutely be an improvement over JO.  Amazing offensive rebounder, husltles, and good defensive player.

The problem I would have is the salary he is paid.  He is scheduled to make 8m next season and 9m the year after.  Basically he would be getting roughly the same (slightly more actually) money that Danny was unwilling to pay Perk.  This just doesn't make sense to me.  If we were unwilling to pay Perk, why would we pay Varejao?  I'd have rather just kept Perk, who I feel is slightly better overall.

??

Varejao and Perkins don't even belong in the same sentence.   Just a few days ago, Doc Rivers said Varejao is an all-star.  He has an 18 PER this year and is pulling down almost 12 rebounds a game.  Him and Irving are the only players on the Cavs that belong in the NBA, and they are single handedly keeping the Cavs in the 'hunt' (nothing special in the East) for a playoff spot.  You take Varejao off Cleveland, and they immediately become Irving (a rookie) and 14 other NBDL'ers.

I know, past failed trades shouldn't be reason to not make future trades, but that is exactly what making this move would be.  An admission by Ainge the Perk trade was a bust.

We already know the Perkins trade was a bust.  Jeff Green was horrible and we needed a solid center last year.  Trading for Sideshow Bob isn't an admission of that.  It'd be just getting a good player.  But Varejao is infinitely the player Perkins is.  I saw you say above that "I'd rather have kept Perk who I feel is slightly better than Varejao overall."  I mean, I guess you could say that because it's your opinion.  But that just isn't the case.  I could say "I feel that Joe Alexander is slightly better than Larry Bird overall" till my face turns blue, but facts are facts.  Perkins has a a 7.2 PER this year and his post-D has declined dramatically to boot.  Varejao is a borderline all-star this year.  Paying Varejao 9M >>>>>>>>>>>> paying Perkins 9M.

And you know what? After all that.  I'm not sure I'd be down with Varejao. He's a guy you get when you already have 1-2 franchise guys in place for the next 5 years (which we don't have - sorry, Rondo.)  But to say I wouldn't want to get him because "we'd have to pay him 9M when that's what we should've given Perkins" is ridiculous.  And I hated the Perkins trade, but come on.  Varejao is like 3x the player Perk is.  That's just Celtic-homerism and irrational Perk love.

[BudweiserCeltic]

Honestly, I'm torn on this trade idea.

On one hand, I really like Varejao as a player.  He would absolutely be an improvement over JO.  Amazing offensive rebounder, husltles, and good defensive player.

The problem I would have is the salary he is paid.  He is scheduled to make 8m next season and 9m the year after.  Basically he would be getting roughly the same (slightly more actually) money that Danny was unwilling to pay Perk.  This just doesn't make sense to me.  If we were unwilling to pay Perk, why would we pay Varejao?  I'd have rather just kept Perk, who I feel is slightly better overall.

I know, past failed trades shouldn't be reason to not make future trades, but that is exactly what making this move would be.  An admission by Ainge the Perk trade was a bust.



By the way, sorry to make this about Perk.  I just had to point out the irony.

Perk who has 4.8 PPG, 46 FG% 5.5 RPG, 7.27 PER... that Perk? I think you guys have a delusion about what Perk has become since his latest big injury. For all this talk about how good defense Perk plays and how we missed him in last year's playoffs, I thought Perk's defense was severely lacking during that span.

[FallGuy]

Varejao's salary is no reason to avoid him. You can move that deal anytime, with ease, if you need cap space.

[KGs Knee]

Look guys, I really don't want to turn this thread into a debate about Perk.  All I was trying to do was point out the irony of the situation.

Whether you feel Varejao or Perk is the better player, neither is that much better than the other.  Both are role players.  Both make about the same amount of money for roughly the same number of years.

The point is, I find it funny we're now in a positon of needing to find a good enough quality center to help us in our pursuit of a title, and the answer is Varejao.  We already had our own equivalent (to whatever degree, you can form your own opinion) of Varejao in Perk, but Danny traded him away.  That is the definiton of irony.

[KGs Knee]

Varejao's salary is no reason to avoid him. You can move that deal anytime, with ease, if you need cap space.

Exactly.

And the same could have been easily done for the player I speak of, who will now remain unnamed.

Edit:  In all fairness, in spite of evrything I said above, I would not be unhappy with Varejao.  I think he is a fine player, and would definitely help the C's.  At the price suggested?  Meh, I could take it or leave it.

[chambers]

Honestly, I'm torn on this trade idea.

On one hand, I really like Varejao as a player.  He would absolutely be an improvement over JO.  Amazing offensive rebounder, husltles, and good defensive player.

The problem I would have is the salary he is paid.  He is scheduled to make 8m next season and 9m the year after.  Basically he would be getting roughly the same (slightly more actually) money that Danny was unwilling to pay Perk.  This just doesn't make sense to me.  If we were unwilling to pay Perk, why would we pay Varejao?  I'd have rather just kept Perk, who I feel is slightly better overall.

I know, past failed trades shouldn't be reason to not make future trades, but that is exactly what making this move would be.  An admission by Ainge the Perk trade was a bust.



By the way, sorry to make this about Perk.  I just had to point out the irony.

Can you honestly compare Perkins to Verajao?
Look at their stats. I know Perk is on a better team, but post injury he has been quite disappointing overall.
Verajao is a complete beast on the boards- the number one offensive rebounder in the NBA.
His defense and hustle are awesome as well.
He is an overpaid role player, but I don't think 8-9 million for a mobile 7 footer is really that overpaid.
And we can move his deal easily should Danny feel he isn't a part of the future after this season or the next.
Worth the gamble for sure.
We would probably have to give them one more piece like Bradley or Daniels or some kind of solid bench piece.

[EDWARDO]

Look guys, I really don't want to turn this thread into a debate about Perk.  All I was trying to do was point out the irony of the situation.

Whether you feel Varejao or Perk is the better player, neither is that much better than the other.  Both are role players.  Both make about the same amount of money for roughly the same number of years.

The point is, I find it funny we're now in a positon of needing to find a good enough quality center to help us in our pursuit of a title, and the answer is Varejao.  We already had our own equivalent (to whatever degree, you can form your own opinion) of Varejao in Perk, but Danny traded him away.  That is the definiton of irony.

Only a complete homer would say that Perk is as good as Varejao at this point. AV is much better and Perk has a big injury history as well. AV's contract is very reasonable.  Its not that close either. 

[LooseCannon]

The problem I would have is the salary he is paid.  He is scheduled to make 8m next season and 9m the year after.  Basically he would be getting roughly the same (slightly more actually) money that Danny was unwilling to pay Perk.  This just doesn't make sense to me.  If we were unwilling to pay Perk, why would we pay Varejao?  I'd have rather just kept Perk, who I feel is slightly better overall.

I would trade a Perk who had never been injured for Varejao.  Heck, I would probably throw in a late first-round pick and I wouldn't laugh and immediately slam the door in their faces if they ask for two.

I think that Cleveland has some interesting pieces.  One-and-done Tristan Thompson, their other first-round pick at #4, is an obvious prospect.  I'm not quite as high on Omri Casspi as Cleveland seems to be, but I can understand why.

If Thompson shows solid development and the Cavs end up with the best player available at whatever spot they draft and make a wise choice in free agent additions (and they will have a ton of cap space), they could look like a young team on the rise.  They may not have a desirable location, but they will have the assets to make a trade for a superstar (and Dan Gilbert is crazy enough to chase that goal).  Its a difficult parlay for all those things to happen, but it's not completely crazy for an optimistic Cavs fan to think their team has a chance of having an exciting young team that can upset the Heat in the 2014 NBA playoffs.

[jdz101]

Honestly, I'm torn on this trade idea.

On one hand, I really like Varejao as a player.  He would absolutely be an improvement over JO.  Amazing offensive rebounder, husltles, and good defensive player.

The problem I would have is the salary he is paid.  He is scheduled to make 8m next season and 9m the year after.  Basically he would be getting roughly the same (slightly more actually) money that Danny was unwilling to pay Perk.  This just doesn't make sense to me.  If we were unwilling to pay Perk, why would we pay Varejao?  I'd have rather just kept Perk, who I feel is slightly better overall.

I know, past failed trades shouldn't be reason to not make future trades, but that is exactly what making this move would be.  An admission by Ainge the Perk trade was a bust.



By the way, sorry to make this about Perk.  I just had to point out the irony.

Perk who has 4.8 PPG, 46 FG% 5.5 RPG, 7.27 PER... that Perk? I think you guys have a delusion about what Perk has become since his latest big injury. For all this talk about how good defense Perk plays and how we missed him in last year's playoffs, I thought Perk's defense was severely lacking during that span.

Hallelujah. Somebody get this man a cookie.

[SHAQATTACK]

can we get this deal done in time for todays game?