If It Aint Broke . . .

Reactions to the trade frenzy that wasn't:

I love blockbuster trades. When your team is looking to buy, there is nothing more exciting than the thought of a major roster addition and all the hype that goes with it. But beyond my natural desire to feel the rush of a major trade, because the Cavs approached this deadline as an elite team with a major asset to move in a buyer's market, my expectations were through the roof. To put it mildly, I had been eagerly anticipating this day for months in the hope that it would be the day that the Cavs potentially took the next step from contender to favorite.

Well, we're now two hours past the deadline and we can be sure that, with the exception of the potential addition of a Joe Smith or Mikki Moore, the Cavs roster will remain unchanged . . . and much to my surprise, I'm thrilled. I don't know what happened in the last 24 hours but somehow, I went from being desperate for the addition of a marquee player to excited about the future that lays ahead as the current roster gears up for the playoffs. How did this happen? Well, I'm not 100% sure but I can basically attribute it to a few factors:

1. I was outraged by the demands of other teams:

Plain and simple, in this economy, any team that is at or near the luxury tax threshold and is not contending should be giving away big contracts solely for cap relief and should be damn thankful for the opportunity to do so. For the Cavs to be offering Wally to a team like Milwaukee, the Clippers or Washington is an absolute gift. These teams have no chance of contending any time in the foreseeable future and will be hemmoraging money all along the way. Really Donald Sterling? You're not interested in a free $10 million dollars in exchange for a guy who will have no material impact on your team's record or gate receipts? Fine, choke on it. Same to you Abe Polin and Herb Kohl. I don't fault Danny Ferry one bit for balking at any demand from a non-contending team that included any young players or picks. We're 41-11 and one of the few teams in the league willing to add a single dollar to our payroll. I think Ferry correctly determined that he had no reason to give in to the delusional demands of GMs that had no leverage, and for that, as much as I wanted another second-tier star, I applaud him.

2. I'm drinking the Cavs kool-aid:

I didn't want to watch the Raptors game last night for two reasons. One, at this time of year, I'm so fixated on the makeup of the roster that I turn a blind eye to any on-court happenings. Two, I knew they were going to win. That second thought it what's really important here. Yes, I know the Raptors are crappy. Still, it was a road game in which the Cavs would be missing two starters...yet, in my head, it was a foregone conclusion. Once I let that sink in for a bit, I started thinking back to the beginning of the season....when a healthy motivated Cavs team was absolutely demolishing everyhing in its path. More than most people, I have always been one to get wrapped up in the trade deadline...but I've also never had the good fortune to root for an awesome team. This team is really really good. They can legitimately win a title. There's a reason that Lebron wanted to keep the current roster intact (and I don't think he was just saying that for PR reasons). He thinks they're good enough to win it all. He's not the type of guy to say that just to be the good soldier. If he believes in this roster, why shouldn't I?

3. You can't completely ignore the money:

Cleveland is an impoverished mid-market city at the precipice of a frightening recession with an owner who just so happens to have his fortune tied up in the mortgage business. Gilbert, Ferry...the fans...none of us can ignore that fact. Now, I'm not for one minute suggesting that these economic realities mean that the team should do anything less than everything they possibly can to retain Lebron (the majority of the franchise's value)...but you still can't just turn a blind eye to the future financial ramifications of a trade. If you're going to pay an extra $20-40 million for a guy (salary X number of additional years on contract X 2 for the luxury tax) you'd better make damn sure that said player puts you over the top. If you're going to commit an extra $100 million to a guy, you'd better be even more certain.

I believe with full confidence that money wasn't the reason the Cavs didn't make a move today. But, and it's a very legitimate but, I'm sure it was a factor in the decision. How do you committ a small fortune to a player who is either a marginal talent upgrade or on the downside of his career without considering how it will impact your ability to re-sign your own players (Varajao), use future expiring contracts to fill more pressing holes down the road (Wallace), or pay the electric bill at the Q (obviously an exaggeration but you get my point). You can't ignore the money. Franchises that have done so in the past have consistently failed throughout the course of sports history. It's just not a good way to run a business, especially in these precarious economic times. Ferry and Gilbert have to build a winner to keep Lebron. I'm sure they're well aware of that fact. But if today is any indication, they realize that the best way to accomplish that goal isn't necessarily to go out and spend like drunken sailors with no regard for the economic ramifications of their decisions.

. . .

So, for those reasons, I'm happy that the Cavs stuck to their guns today. In regard to the deals that weren't, here are my thoughts: Camby was a no brainer if he could've been had for expiring money alone. Jamison was less of a no brainer but enough of an impact guy that his contract would've been worth the risk if the deal had just been for expiring money. Amare was another no-brainer but I don't think that deal was ever close to happening. As for the Shaq deal, I was somewhat indifferent although I can't imagine paying $40 million for a 37 year-old Shaq next year. Still, if, as rumored, the piece to be traded was Wallace rather than Wally's expiring deal, the additional cost might have been worth it for the extra offense Shaq would've brought to the table. As for Richard Jefferson, I've never liked his game and even though he can score, I'm happy the Cavs didn't bite on his 43% shooting and giant contract.

In terms of the other deals and non-deals of the day, I really only have a few comments:

1. Watching the Bulls work is insanely entertaining. Calling them a rudderless ship is an insult to rudderless ships everywhere. What on gods earth are they doing?...although in fairness, any day that you get rid of Larry Hughes is a good day in my book.

2. Dear Wizards: You still just don't get it, do you? Keep clinging to the idea that once everyone is healthy, you'll be a contender. As a Cavs fan, I'm just trembling at the thought of Arenas limping around firing up terrible shots while Blake Griffin, Brendan Haywood, and 30 somethings Caron Butler and Antawn Jamison look on in disgust. Great plan Wiz. Keep swimming the opposite direction while teams like the Cavs try to throw you life preservers.

3. Probably a smart move by the Magic getting Alston. You can't just take a 39-14 team and leave them for dead without at least trying to fill the void left by Nelson. Still, i'm not exactly worried. Alston is a chucker with a PER in the Pavlovic zone, not a guy who can really fill Nelson's shoes.

4. I read somehwere that Boston is pretty confident that they can land Joe Smith if and when he gets bought out. I have no idea what Smith's intentions really are but I can't imagine that he is really thinking about signing with Boston over Cleveland. If he is, maybe someone should let him in on a little secret: The Cavs are better than the Celtics.

That's it. Time to put this deadline in the books and get ready for what I fully expect will be the most exciting Spring and Summer of Cavs basketball ever. I'll say it one last time: I love this team and I sincerely believe that they can win this thing.

Read the rest of this article

When the Suns Trade Their Guy, That's Amare

Rumors abound around the Interwebs that the Cavs and Phoenix Suns are talking about a possible deal sending PF Amare Stoudemire to Cleveland in exchange for the expiring contract of Wally Szczerbiak, J.J. Hickson and a draft pick. While I usually dismiss these rumors as the longings of the ESPN Trade Machine analysts, I give this one credence because the conversations are being reported by the very reputable Brian Windhorst of the Plain Dealer. As you recall, Windhorst broke the Hughes/Wallace trade of last season and told Cleveland about Mo Williams' arrival, while Windhorst was driving home from the hospital after a long illness. Needless to say, when Windhorst reports something, I listen.

As a Cavs fan, it's hard not to get very excited about the possibility of Amare lining up next to Lebron, Mo, Delonte and Z. Amare is a bonafide star in the NBA. He has been named as an All-Star 4 times in his young career, 2005, 2007, 2008, and the present season. On the year Amare is averaging 21 pts, 8 rebounds, and over a block a game. And while I love the intensity of Big Ben, compare that to Wallace's numbers as our starting PF, 3 points a game, a little under 7 boards and 1.5 blocks - essentially an offensive blackhole. Amare is only 26 years old and will most likely be looking for an extension if he gets traded.

Let's step back and think about this deal. The Cavs get a young offensively dominate big man, for Wally's expiring contract, an exciting, but inconsistent, player in J.J. Hickson, and probably a very late first round draft pick. And with Wally most likely getting bought out and potentially even returning to the Cavs, Cleveland gets a 4-time All-Star for Hickson, (who at his developmental peak may be a Carlos Boozer type player) and unknown quantity in what is shaping up to be a weak draft class. So, the question becomes, what's more important - having an Amare Stoudemire on the team now or keeping Hickson's potential and the chemistry of the team intact. I think Hickson showed in the Lakers' game against Lamar Odom that he cannot be trusted yet. Windhorst on his weekly podcast indicated that Mike Brown currently does not feel comfortable playing Hickson in important game situations. It really boils down to come playoff time who do you want guarding Kevin Garnett or Chris Bosh - Hickson or Stoudemire? The answer is obvious. I like Hickson's potential, but you have to give talent to get talent. The Suns aren't going to give up Amare for the rights to Trajan Langdon.

There are some negatives to the Stoudemire deal. First, Yahoo is already reporting the deal has fallen flat, and if anything is to be worked out that a third team may have to get involved. However, at the same time, their article points out the realities that Steve Kerr and Danny Ferry are very close, having played together with the Spurs and the Cavs. A good working relationship may go a long way to smoothing out any holdups which may kill other deals. And, if this something both GMs want to get done, their friendship makes it all the more likely.

Second, the obvious weakness in Stoudemire's game is his defense. As explained by ESPN's John Hollinger, "He's a poor help defender and tends to pick up cheap fouls...fouls tend to be a big differentiator with him -- if he gets a quick two, he'll don a toreador outfit for the remainder of the half." Mike Brown prides himself on having a defensively sound basketball team. As a Sun, Amare wasn't really expected to play any defense with Mike D'Antoni's style of basketball. Can he come to the Cavs and pick up his defensive intensity? Well, the same criticisms were leveled at Mo Williams before he joined the Cavs, and it appears apparent things have worked out in that respect. Lebron and Mike Brown have been very successful at getting players to buy into the team's philosphy. Even Wally, known to wear a toreador outfit himself at times, has shown a knack for making the tough defensive plays and fighting for rebounds this season.

Another red flag is that Amare did have microfracture surgery on his knee during the 2005-2006 season, missing almost the entire year. I'm always a bit weary of committing money to a player with such a serious injury in his past. However, since his return, Stoudemire has played at the same level of basketball and has shown no signs of any ill effects - playing every game in the 2006-2007 season and 79 games last year. Making the All-Star team that last three years also has eased my concerns on this point.

There have also been some grumblings about Amare's desire to be the main man on any team to which he is dealt. Obviously, with the Cavs Amare will never fill that role with Lebron here. If Amare wants to be the top dog, I suggest he look to Memphis or a team of that caliber. I mean, Ricky Davis was the leader of a very bad Cavs' team. However, if Amare wants to win, get national exposure next to the best player in the game and help build a dynasty, then let's welcome him abroad. It's hard to imagine that Stoudemire won't be excited about teaming up with Lebron. I mean, look at the picture above - it's obvious he's praying to get a championship. Trust me, Amare, we're praying with you.

If the Cavs do indeed make a move for Amare, they must make sure that it won't greatly impact the team chemistry. The last thing the Cavs need is to destroy what appears to be one of the most cohesive groups in the NBA. With Amare coming over, the Cavs would have to consider how the rotation would be impacted. Would Wallace be alright with coming off the bench or would he take it as an insult? Would Andy be happy becoming the 4th big man as he heads towards the free agency? How does Amare mesh with Z? If Wally does indeed get bought out, how does a month off before returning impact his game? And mostly importantly - is Lebron on board? Every move has to be made with an eye towards keeping Lebron long-term. Lebron has to be asked, point blank - is Amare a guy you feel like you can play with for several years to come?

In the end, the goal remains to put the team in the best possible position to win a championship this season. Adding Amare, no question, seems to make the Cavs a better team than they are without him. Do I think this deal gets done in the end? I wouldn't hold my breath. Am I glad that Ferry is exploring every opition and avenue? I'd be disappointed if he wasn't. Just hearing the Cavs being connected to Amare and other big names on the market is evidence that the goal of this team is to do whatever it takes to win it all now - which is something Cleveland fans haven't experienced in a long, long time. Share your thoughts Cavs fans - this season may get a lot more exciting very shortly. (Images from Real GM, Dime Mag). Read the rest of this article

NBA Trade Deadline: T-1 Month (Part II)

In part one of this piece, I scoured the rosters of 17 NBA teams in search of a trading partner for the Cavaliers, as we are now in the shadow of the February 19 trade dealine. Based on contract status, fit, and team positioning, I came up with only one player from the group of 17 teams that I thought would be a logical fit in Cleveland: Vince Carter.

If you find that last sentence to be a bit depressing, you're not alone. But fear not CMCR nation because today we take a look at the remaining 12 teams, each of whom is either a) a bottom dweller, or b) a team that, for one reason or another, is likely to make a deal come February.

Without further ado, I present The Bottom Dwellers:

18. Charlotte - The player that jumps out at you on this roster is obviously Gerald Wallace. The guy is 26 years old, 6'7, and averages about 16 points and 7.5 rebounds a game. What's more, Charlotte's roster is such an abomination that even the Bobcats' misguided regime knows they need to blow the whole thing up and start over. So, Wallace could probably be had for a package of expiring contracts and non-lottery picks. On the surface, it seems like the Cavs should be interested. For some reason though, I just don't like this move. Wallace makes about $10 million a year for the next three years, which isn't great, but it's certainly less than what guys like Vince Carter or Michael Redd are going to make over that period. The problem is that I just don't trust Wallace's numbers. He seems to me like the classic case of a guy whose stats are inflated because he's the only offensive threat on the floor for his team on any given night. I like to call this "the Zach Randolph effect." Also, much like Randolph, Wallace has never played on a quality team nor has he played a meaningful minute in 6 1/2 seasons. I understand that he makes a lot of sense on paper but I just don't see him joining a championship calliber team in mid-season, buying into the team concept, playing team defense, and doing the little things that good teams do to win games. Add this to the fact that he's not a very good shooter (45% from the floor and 24% from three) and the bottom line on Wallace is . . . no thanks.

Other than Wallce, you have two guys in Boris Diaw and Emeka Okafor that could definitely upgrade the Cavs' frontcourt but make too much money over too many years to warrant consideration.

19. Chicago - Hahahaha. Wait, one more time: Hahahahaha. You stupid assholes. It seems like another lifetime but only a few short years ago, the Bulls were the most imposing young franchise in basketball. They were absolutely loaded with 1) cap room, 2) young talent, and 3) draft picks. To a lesser extent, they were an Eastern Conference version of what the Blazers are today. Now, several terrible signings, poor draft picks, and bad extensions later, the Bulls are in shambles. I'm not even going to go into the whole Larry Hughes trade. It speaks for itself. Wait, one more time altogether now: Hahahahaha. Ok, so the point here is that the Bulls are atrocious and are probably willing to trade just about anyone. Unfortunately for the Bulls, I don't think they're going to find too many takers. Drew Gooden might go somewhere but it won't be Cleveland. We've, uh, outgrown him a little bit. Luol Deng probably isn't available because the Bulls have convinced themselves that he's twice the player that he really is (plus his contract is ungodly). Beyond that, there isn't anything here worth talking about, unless you have a fetish for guys who at one time were overhyped and are now simply overpaid.

20. Golden State - Wow did they ever panic and soil themselves when Baron Davis left town. $67 milloin for Corey Maggette and Ronny Turiaf? This roster is in bad shape but the only guys that might be available don't really help the Cavs. The aforementioned Turiaf is a big body but has no offensive game and makes too much money. Stephen Jackson is instant offense but he's got 4 years left on his deal, is 30 years old, and only shoots 39% from the floor. He's also insane but that's another story for another day. This team is of no help. (side note poll question: better offseason extension: Monta Ellis or Gil Arenas?)

21. Indiana - Troy Murphy is a big body who averages 12 and 11 but he makes over $10 million a year for the next two years. If I were Dan Gilbert, I would have a hard time paying $20 million in both 2010 and 2011 for Troy Murphy (remember, we are 100% going to be a luxury tax team as long as Lebron is wearing the wine and gold...and blue). Mike Dunleavy is another guy I would consider but he's a crappy rebounder and I don't know if Indiana would part with him for expiring deals alone. I can't see him being worth any more than that.

22. L.A. Clippers - This is the team that has the guy I covet more than anyone else in the league right now. You guessed it: Ricky Davis. Ok, actually it's Marcus Camby. This guy would be PERFECT for the Cavs right now. He averages roughly 12 points, 14 boards, and 2.5 blocks a night, shoots 50% from the floor, and makes roughly $10 million for one more season. In my estimation, he's the ideal addition and would make the Cavs the prohibitive favorite to win the whole thing. Camby is a tenacious defender who would thrive in the Cavs' system. What's more, he would come off the books for the summer of 2010 making it an almost risk-free move. I say almost because Camby is 34 and not exactly immune to injury.

The real problem though is that the Clippers are the absolute dumbest franchise in the NBA and from what I've heard (from my inside sources like...the internet), the Clippers are saying that he's not available. I just don't get it. At 9-32, why on earth would Donald Sterling (aka the cheapest bastard alive) want to pay Camby next year? Bottom line: Even if the Clippers are claiming he's not available, the Cavs should throw everything they have at this one. I might even include Hickson and/or a #1 to get it done. That's how much I think Camby could do for this team.

Other than Camby, Chris Kaman is another big body that could probably be had for the right price. This one doesn't excite me. His contract is big, it runs for 3 more years, and I just don't think he'd be worth the money or the risk.

Finally, there's good old Zach Randolph. He makes about $15 million a year for two more years but his numbers are huge: 22 points and 11 boards a game. I don't care. I wouldn't touch him. I don't think you can roll the dice with your franchise on a guy that may very well be suffering from Larry Hughes disease (has no interest in winning). Plus, he's a little bit undersized at 6'9 and is a very poor defender. If I were Ferry, I would stay far away from this one.

23. Memphis - I don't really see a fit here. Darko is a big body but he's soft and unproductive. I doubt the Griz would move him for an expiring deal anyway.

24. Minnesota - The only player on this roster that has some value and might be available is Mike Miller. I, for one, am not interested. His contract expires after next year but he plays the 2, only averages about 9 points a game, and is only shooting 44% from the field and 33% from 3. There's nothing wrong with these numbers...they just don't motivate me, and shouldn't motivate Ferry, to spend luxury taxed dollars to acquire him. My basic rule for this trade deadline is that the Cavs either need to get a prolific scorer or a big man who can play at least 20 quality minutes a game. Miller does not fit either description.

25. New York - The only player on the roster with value is David Lee and the Knicks must do something with his expiring deal if they are really going to clear their entire roster for the summer of 2010. The problem here is twofold: 1) because Lee is expiring, I would think the Knicks are going to want either young inexpensive talent or draft picks for him, and 2) I think New York would be very hesitant to give Cleveland any piece that might help them retain Lebron down the line. Lee would be an excellent fit for this Cavs team but I just don't see any way that it happens.

26. Oklahoma City - First things first: I want no part of Earl Watson. He's a horrendous shooter and averages 6 a game. I'd rather have West/Gibson/Lebron bringing the ball up when Williams is on the bench than Watson. The other interesting guy on this roster is Joe Smith. If the Cavs only move at this trade deadline is to get Smith off a buyout, I would be content. He's a consumate professional, a big body, and a guy who would give the Cavs that little bit of additional frontcourt depth that they desperately need. Smith isn't really a trade candidate but I would certainly court him if he were to be bought out. Other than Smith, I don't see any other big men on this roster that are likely to be moved.

27. Sacramento - First of all, based on what I've heard, Salmons is out. The Kings don't want to move him. Given that he's averaging 19 a game and has a reasonable contract running two more seasons, I don't necessarily blame them. I would suspect that any move involving Salmons will have to include a young player and/or picks coming back to Sacramento. The other guy that would make some sense for both the Cavs and Kings is Brad Miller. He averages 12 and 8 but makes a ton of money next season. If push came to shove, and the Cavs had the opportunity to get Miller (which I'm almost positive they will), I would do the deal under a few conditions: 1) The Cavs only have to give up Wally's expiring contract in the deal, 2) Gilbert is ok with paying a huge luxury tax bill next year after he gives Varejao a big extension, and 3) Szczerbiak does the secret handshake agreement to come back after he gets bought out. Give me those three things and I'm sold on Brad Miller. I might even do it wouthout knowing Wally would come back. If, and this is a big if, the Cavs survive the East, Miller would be a nice luxury to have against the Lakers massive front line.

28. Utah - I know, I know, I put them in the wrong category. At 25-18, they're certainly not bottom dwellers but I forgot to write about them in Part I so cut me some slack. The chatter around the league seems to be that Larry Miller doesn't want to pay the luxury tax so Utah will be looking to move someone next month. Boozer's contract is expiring so the Cavs really wouldn't have anything to offer to get him (and yes, if you're wondering, I would take him in a heartbeat. I don't care if he burned down my house...I would still jump on the chance to get him back if it meant a championship). Kirilenko is the other guy that would be a very interesting fit in Cleveland. For the money (about $15 million a year for two more years) he's clearly overpaid. He doesn't start and he only averages about 12 and 5. Still, he's a big body, he's only 27, and he would probably be rejuvinated if someone liberated him from the living hell that is Jerry Sloan. Kirilenko would undoubtedly be a great addition to the Cavs and would be a huge factor in any series against Boston, Orlando, or the Lakers. Still, I don't see how this deal gets done unless the Jazz are absolutely desperate to get out of cap trouble so they can re-sign Boozer and Millsap. They're too good of a team to be be giving key contributors away for nothing in February. Plus, Dan Gilbert would have to OK paying a role player in excess of $30 million over the next two years. I'm not sure I can see that happening knowing what Varejao is going to command this offseason. The only other guy of interest here would be Okur because he's a big body but I haven't heard anything about the Jazz looking to move him.

29. Washington - My thoughts on this franchise have been well-documented. Abe Polin is an idiot but unfortunately for the Cavs, that idiocy is what is standing in the way of the Cavs getting Caron Butler or Antawn Jamison. For the record, I would take Butler in a heartbeat and Jamison in only a slightly longer heartbeat because his contract is lengthier. Both of these guys would, in my estimation, put the Cavs over the top, but sadly, I don't think it matters because neither will be traded. I don't see how Polin can throw up the white flag when Gilbert Arenas still has 5 1/2 years and roughly a trillion dollars left on his absolutely indefensible contract. Even if you cleared Jamison and Butler off your books, you'd still have a team without much cap space and you'd have an extremely pissed off fan base (largely because they're some of the most ignorant basketball fans in the league and have yet to figure out that they have no chance of winning a playoff series with their current core, even if, by some miracle, they were all healthy at the same time). Add in the fact that these franchises are mortal enemies and I think the chances of a deal getting done are slim and none. Oh well. Enjoy your 20 win team Washington fans. Wait, what's that? It's because of injuries? Oh, well in that case, enjoy your 35 win team next year Washington. Jackasses.

Conclusion: The Cavs need to go hard after Camby. If that fails, they should take a hard look at Vince Carter. Finally, if nothing unexpected materializes, they should consider Brad Miller, or perhaps even Kirilenko for expiring money. If none of those options is available, keep the team as constructed, get healthy, hope that Joe Smith gets bought out, and try to win a title with a team that is, when healthy, as good as any other team in the league. As a Cavs fan, I could live with that.

Read the rest of this article