What's new
By:

Report: #5, Favors, Burks for Cavs' #1 pick

Yay or Nay?

  • Yay

    Votes: 68 56.7%

  • Nay

    Votes: 52 43.3%
  • Total voters
    120
UGLI baby said:
Denver is not going to be able to trade a quarter, 2 dimes, and a few nickels for a dollar bill (Love).


£¥£
Click to expand...

But there is no real downside for Denver... If Minny doesn't bite then they just keep Afflalo. They got him for very little.
 
UGLI baby said:
Ya, it's a good trade for them, I just don't think it has anything at all to do with Love.

Minny would lol @ any offer DEN can put together.


£¥£
Click to expand...

Minny seems to be going at this wrong. The coach is acting GM so he's going to try and get guys that help him win. It sucks for them because they've been rebuilding, but they should go the other way.

I could see Saunders going for a Faried, Chandler, 11 and Aflalo deal and keeping Minny as the 9th or 10th seed in the West.

They should call up Boston and take 6, 17, and a few Brooklyn picks and move on, but their coach/GM situation will prevent that type of deal.
 
UGLI baby said:
Ya, it's a good trade for them, I just don't think it has anything at all to do with Love.

Minny would lol @ any offer DEN can put together.


£¥£
Click to expand...

Also, I don't think Afflalo can be packaged with other players once he has been traded. Think you can trade him by himself, but have to wait 30 days or something to package him up, so you may be right.
 
Yeah, I'm having trouble understanding why Orlando would do this. The only thing I can come up with is:

1. They must have been holding off on the Denver deal until they could confirm with 100% certainty that Cleveland deal wasn't going through.
2. They found out it wasn't going to go through, or gave the Cavs and ultimatum, and Cavs didn't do the deal.
3. They went with their back up plan, trading to Denver to free up cap room - potentially to make a free agent run or to absorb contracts for more assets next year?

If those three are true, that means:

1. Either the Sixers or the Jazz have a deal in place with the Cavs and Orlando bowed out.
2. The Cavs were just messing with everyone, aren't going to trade the pick.

I lean towards #2 - I think the David Locke, "Favors was never a key part of the deal" quote, plus the Orlando moves, plus a recent Chad Ford tweet all indicate Cavs are keeping the pick.
 
Orlando is obviously out of the Cavs sweepstakes after that trade to Denver. Why are they trading him for Denver's trash? Makes no sense for Orlando unless they are trying to clear cap space.
 
David Locke @Lockedonsports · 23m
“@downrightdave @davidjsmith1232 @Lockedonsports said he wasn’t an integral part, not that they were false.” correct. Thanks 4 listening.
Click to expand...

Any idea what the integral part of the deal is then if the deal indeed included favors but he wasnt the integral part?? Makes zero sense wtf?
 
I am so relieved from David Locke this day. This thing, it is very big package for Gerald Green. Take out Favors and this is worth discussion. I am now in favor of this 5 & 23 for Wiggins trade.
 
jiggamanjazz said:
Any idea what the integral part of the deal is then if the deal indeed included favors but he wasnt the integral part?? Makes zero sense wtf?
Click to expand...

The integral part of the trade is the swap of the #5 and #1 picks - those are projected to be all-stars. Favors is a good player, but not all-star talent. This is like Clinton's famous line about not having sexual intercourse with that woman. Technically true. And then it depends on what your definition of "is" is. What IS the definition of integral?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top