Cavs continue spending spree

[Guest]

Gilbert's son..

Lol...I'm not sure if it's wrong to laugh at this but still ..lmao

[Dnice]

a rich youth, that's all

[Guest]

a rich youth, that's all

Uh huh...lol

[yungsta]

Please tell me this is a joke? So the league is just gonna let some BS trade like this happen just like they did with Pau Gasoline becoming a Laker and getting 2 championships huh..this is crap. Adam Silver, you are a puppet of David Stern...ridiculous

 

its not like they are getting these guys for free, the owner is paying the ultimate price of a 100 mil+ luxury tax, which few owners in the league would do.

 

edit: actually I dont think any other owner besides the nets owner would even entertain the idea of taking on that much salary.

Edited July 6, 2015 by yungsta

[Guest]

The cap is not a hard cap.  Nobody cared when Brooklyn had that ridiculous tax bill. Cavs will have theirs.

[yungsta]

these are the kind of scenarios the cavs are facing once everyone gets paid and contracts are finalized. NO ONE is going to stop dan gilbert from spending that kind of money if he is willing, especially since luxury tax money gets redistributed around the league.

 

[IheartVolt]

The ironic thing here is that Gilbert is the main one who cried and had the CP3 to the Lakers axed.

Hypocrite

[Guest]

I always thought that at the crux of the league's veto of the CP3 deal was the fact that the franchise itself was league-owned.  Basically they vetoed the deal much like Belkin tried to veto the JoeJohn deal.

 

IOW, it had nothing to do with competitive imbalance or w/e.  They just thought it was a bad trade.

 

There's no reason for the league to step in on any of CLE's deals since they're not a league-owned franchise, right?

[Guest]

I always thought that at the crux of the league's veto of the CP3 deal was the fact that the franchise itself was league-owned. Basically they vetoed the deal much like Belkin tried to veto the JoeJohn deal.

IOW, it had nothing to do with competitive imbalance or w/e. They just thought it was a bad trade.

There's no reason for the league to step in on any of CLE's deals since they're not a league-owned franchise, right?

Yep, that was exactly it. The league owned the team.

[AHF]

I always thought that at the crux of the league's veto of the CP3 deal was the fact that the franchise itself was league-owned.  Basically they vetoed the deal much like Belkin tried to veto the JoeJohn deal.

 

IOW, it had nothing to do with competitive imbalance or w/e.  They just thought it was a bad trade.

 

There's no reason for the league to step in on any of CLE's deals since they're not a league-owned franchise, right?

 

Yes, although it isn't quite that clean.  The Commish had to be getting calls from teams pissed off that the Lakers were going to reload with Paul.  Other owners were surely jealous and I have to say that almost surely played a factor in why the league nixed the deal in addition to the merits of the deal on its own.  

[LucastheThird]

Yep, that was exactly it. The league owned the team.

I could've sworn there were other owners crying foul with that trade. Maybe my memory is fuzzy.

[AHF]

I could've sworn there were other owners crying foul with that trade. Maybe my memory is fuzzy.

 

There were.  The Commish made the call but it is hard to separate the true motives behind that.  

[Guest]

I could've sworn there were other owners crying foul with that trade. Maybe my memory is fuzzy.

Yes owners were pissy and they were able to be heard because the league owned the Pels at the time. If they had a 'typical' owner I don't think they would have been able to exert any pressure to have trade rescinded. Edited July 6, 2015 by JayBirdHawk

[Guest]

Yes, although it isn't quite that clean.  The Commish had to be getting calls from teams pissed off that the Lakers were going to reload with Paul.  Other owners were surely jealous and I have to say that almost surely played a factor in why the league nixed the deal in addition to the merits of the deal on its own.  

 

Yeah, I'm sure the owners had some words which could have factored in.  However, I recall thinking the package was lopsided so I wasn't surprised the trade was nixed citing 'bad trade'.

[Guest]

18 mins ago - via NetsDaily

In a Sports Center appearance on Monday morning, Chris Broussard said that the Nets and Cavs have had talks on sending Joe Johnson to Cleveland, “there’s nothing happening right now” and discussions are “stagnant.” He added that Lebron James is interested in progress of the talks, that “he wants as much talent as they can get.” He explained… “At one point it seemed like the ball was in the Cavaliers’ court The Nets were willing to do it .. Brendan Haywood’s expiring, potentially non-guaranteed contract and Anderson Varejao for Joe Johnson. The Cavaliers balked. They were hesitant, they didnt want to do it because of the luxury tax implications … It would put them heavily in the luxury tax and they didn’t want to do it. . Now it seems like the Nets don’t really want to do it either. They’re not willing to take back Anderson Varejao’s contract. At one point, they were looking for a third or fourth team to take on Varejao. Now, i’m told that right now, talks are stagnant. So there’s nothing happening right now. Obviously, this could be revisited at any moment

Trade, Anderson Varejao, Brendan Haywood, Joe Johnson,Brooklyn Nets, Cleveland Cavaliers

[benhillboy]

I'm getting a kick out of LeBron dangling Gilbert by his nuts. He gonna make this man shell out 100 mill just because of some emotional statement trashing LeBron 5 years ago and they still won't win it all. How long ago have we moved on from Joe and Jamal? Clowns.

Edited July 7, 2015 by benhillboy

[Guest]

2 hours ago - via Cleveland Plain Dealer

Northeast Ohio Media Group confirms an ESPN report that the Cavaliers are exploring the possibility of trading for one of the most electric sixth man in the league: shooting guard Jamal Crawford of the Los Angeles Clippers. The club is looking into using the Brendan Haywood non-guaranteed $10.5 million salary to acquire the reserve-scoring specialist.

Cavs looking at Jamal Crawford

Marc Stein: Given complexities of the Joe Johnson talks, sources say Cavs looking into the prospect of a simpler deal headlined by Crawford and Haywood

Trade, Brendan Haywood, Jamal Crawford, Joe Johnson,Brooklyn Nets, Cleveland Cavaliers, Los Angeles Clippers

Edited July 7, 2015 by JayBirdHawk

[Guest]

I'm getting a kick out of LeBron dangling Gilbert by his nuts. He gonna make this man shell out 100 mill just because of some emotional statement trashing LeBron 5 years ago and they still won't win it all. How long ago have we moved on from Joe and Jamal? Clowns.

 

Although I'll never take the stance of defending that clown Gilbert.  What LeeBrun is doing is bush league and is a clear conflict of interest.  Long story short, he gets paid when Thompson gets paid so he's blackmailing the Calfs into over-paying a hustle guy on a deal which will likely outlast Jaymes' time in CLE.

 

If I'm Gilbert I don't do it and dare Jaimes to leave.  I'm sorry at some point you have to take control of your franchise.

 

Jaemes will land somewhere despite the stink he'll have after leaving CLE again (if it comes to that).  However, I'd venture to say that one of the reasons CLE lost in the Finals was all the crappy roster additions forced by LeiBron.

 

He's the best in the game, but that doesn't mean he's meant to be a player-coach-GM

[Guest]

Maurice Williams to sign with Cavs

Adreian Wojnarowski: Mo Williams agreed to a two-year, $4.3M deal with Cleveland, including a player option, league sources tell Yahoo.

[Randy]

Maybe the Nets spending spree of a few years ago will presage what happens with the Cavs.  Never did the Nets much good, and at some point you just have too many player$ and not enough basketballs.