May 22, 2013

Cavaliers to bring in Sullinger, Melo for workouts

June 20, 2012 by 30 Comments

The Cavaliers are expected to bring in Ohio State big man Jared Sullinger on Friday for a workout. No doubt all eyes will be on his red-flagged back. When Sullinger scheduled the workout with the Cavs, he was probably hoping the team might consider him with the fourth pick. That dream has sailed. Now, I’m sure he is hoping that he doesn’t fall to the Cavaliers at number twenty-four.

He shouldn’t. It would surprise this writer if he made it past the Rockets at 16 (their second selection), and I’d be STUNNED if he made it past the Celtics who own picks number 21 and 22.

In his chat yesterday at Cleveland.com, Terry Pluto was adamant that if Sullinger falls to 24, the Cavs shouldn’t hesitate to take a chance on him-

“That’s where you take chances- at 24. Not at 4.”

The Cavaliers are also looking to bring in Syracuse big man Fab Melo, who could also be in town on Friday. Melo was a popular choice for the Cavaliers at 24 on many mock drafts until recently. His stock seems to be on the rise.

Related Posts

Zemanta
Filed Under: Headlines Tagged With: , ,
  • architrance

    Maybe Sully isn’t there at 10, but I wouldn’t be opposed to trading up 6 spots or so to nab him.

  • Harv 21

    Grant to staff earlier today: “Guys, please, stop repeating everything I say about these workouts to the media. Even if they call you and say they won’t use your name. Cuz it’s happened like 9 times already and Mr. Baker and I are starting to get a little annoyed. See, sometimes it’s better not to share what we think. Ok? Hey, I’m serious. Ok, so anyway here’s where I rank the guys we’ve seen so far, someone hand me that sharpie …”

  • mgbode

    I see Sullinger as a slightly better version of Glen Davis, so it would make sense to see him land in Boston where Baby had a couple good years.

  • Steve

    I can’t stand this passive attitude people have toward this draft. As if safely hitting a single will turn this Cavs team from a 20-30 win also-ran into a legitimate contender. It won’t. Now, I understand that Pluto is talking about Sullinger, but Sullinger doesn’t have the upside to be the #4 pick in this draft. The Cavs have to get someone with the tools to be a legitimate all-star, and if that means taking a chance, go for it. If it doesn’t work? You have another chance to get yourself a superstar. If the Cavs draft someone who is a nice solid piece, maybe they turn into a 40 win team that has a chance to steal a game from the #1 seed in the first round of the playoffs.

  • BrownsFanSF

    Not to totally thread-jack, but Cavs the Blog is reporting that GS may be willing to give us the 7 for AV and the 24. Sounds like a slam dunk to me! Anyone else know anything??

  • DontbringLBJback

    Have not heard anything about that, but I agree that would be a good trade.

  • DMohio

    I agree with Pluto that the Cavaliers absolutely cannot miss on #4. They need to take a sure option there. The worst pick of the LeBron era was Luke Jackson – we needed that young star to put next to LeBron and instead we got a bum. Take risk at 24 if there is high reward, but we need that low risk pick at #4.

  • 5KMD

    Just looked up the 2004 draft and after the Cavs took Luke, Biedrins, Kris Humphries, Al Jefferson, Josh Smith, Jammer Nelson, Tony Allen, Kevin Martin among others went in the first round. Josh Smith would have been nice.
    On a positive note of this big miss, however, is that Delonte West and Andy V both got drafted that year so the Cavs kind of got a couple good players out of the 2004 draft anyway.
    Lebron just made the Cavs too good, too fast. Needed a top 5 pick the year after he was drafted and maybe a top 10 the year after that.

  • DMohio

    like the Thunder.. I agree. Sadly, we got Luke Jackson and Larry Hughes, not Russ Westbrook and James Harden.

  • Vindictive_Pat

    You always want to limit risk… upside and risk are mutually exclusive though. If we’re talking power forwards, the Cavs could grab Robinson at #4 and get a player with both higher upside and less risk than Sullinger.

  • Steve

    Except, of course, Jackson wasn’t considering much of a risk. The injuries didn’t really show until after he was drafted. At the time, everyone thought the Cavs got a nice, solid, low-risk piece that would be able to free up some room for Lebron to create, but wasn’t going to turn into a superstar.

  • Steve

    The high risk guys they could have taken included Biedrins, Al Jefferson, Josh Smith, and then (because it’s only fair to show the other side) Robert Smith, Sebastian Telfair, and Pavel Podzolkin. I’m still taking the home run swing.

  • Steve

    I agree that Sullinger shouldn’t have been in the discussion at 4, even before the recent developments. But I was talking past Sullinger, to other low-risk guys in this draft.

    And I disagree on always wanting to limit risk. Risk and reward go hand in hand. If the right team gets their hands on Barnes or Drummond (i.e. not the Wizards or Kings), then it was essential to take on that risk.

  • Steve

    I agree that Sullinger shouldn’t have been in the discussion at 4, even before the recent developments. But I was talking past Sullinger, to other low-risk guys in this draft.

    And I disagree on always wanting to limit risk. Risk and reward go hand in hand. If the right team gets their hands on Barnes or Drummond (i.e. not the Wizards or Kings), then it was essential to take on that risk.

  • http://www.waitingfornextyear.com/ WFNYRick

    Very interesting proposal. So the Cavs could potentially get Beal and Lamb? Or maybe Barnes and Waiters.

  • Vindictive_Pat

    You might find that risk and reward often go hand in hand but I would argue that they’re really not related. Guys with high reward aren’t always risky and guys who are really risky don’t always yield an abnormally high or low reward (sometimes they just turn out adequate). There are lots of guys on Wall Street who make a living trying to limit risk and maximize the reward, and that’s what the Cavs should do as well, in my opinion.
    I don’t necessarily think that you are thinking this way, but I think a lot of times we get focused on taking players who are hyper-athletic over players who have great basketball skills because we think that there’s a certain lower ceiling for the players who fit that bill. I don’t think that is true though… I can think of a lot of guys who are probably among the worst pure athletes at their position who were dominant in the NBA because of their skills: Tim Duncan, Dirk Nowitzki, Steve Nash, Larry Bird, and John Stockton come to mind.

  • mgbode

    don’t forget Hickson instead of Ibaka

  • mgbode

    yes please. Beal + Barnes (likely best case scenario, I know)

    Beal/MKG/Barnes at 4
    J.Lamb/Zeller/PJIII/Drummond/ at 7

    notice I’m much more willing to swing for the fences with a 2nd lottery pick.

  • mgbode

    Barnes is considered one of the safest picks in this draft. The concerns are more that his upside isn’t as big as some of the others.

  • BrownsFanSF

    Exactly, there at lot’s of interesting options. Especially when you factor that NO pick may be for sale for anyone willing to take Ariza and Oak’s contracts. Or maybe we stink one more year while the team grows and can get Cody Zeller next near. Lots of variables

  • Steve

    Sure, there are guys who (taken at the very top of the draft) are already great players with the potential to be superstars. And sometimes guys bust. I’m not sure what you’re trying to prove there.

    And considering how important height is when considering physical abilities, guys like Duncan, Dirk and Bird were certainly not lacking. And Nash is one of the best athletes in the game, no idea why he’s included. And I know understand why Stockton is labeled as un-athletic, but that is certainly not the case, and it’s not like NBA teams are pooh-poohing guards who can shoot 58% in college anyway.

  • Steve

    We must be looking at upside differently. Barnes has as much potential to be great as anyone in this draft.

  • mgbode

    makes me think of a complete boom/bust scenario:

    MKG at #4
    Drummond at #7
    PJIII somewhere in the mid-to-late teens (for #34 + Miami’s 2013 1st & ability to swap with Lakers)

    If you’re gonna swing, then swing hard!

  • mgbode

    I agree (particularly if you can move him to SG). But, reading the scouting reports there were concerns that his ceiling isn’t high enough (doesn’t play with enough athleticism, etc.)

  • Vindictive_Pat

    I’m proving that risk and reward exist together, but are not related and you would of course want to limit risk.
    Nash has great endurance, but he’s not a gifted athlete. His vertical, his speed, his strength… I’m not sure I understand what you define as a gifted athlete. What made Nash great was his ability to read defenses, his ability to change speeds, and his ability to run all day. I just don’t understand what you define as “safe” and why we shouldn’t look at players with the #24 pick who are “safe”… what does that mean? A guy who is considered safe because of his great skills but limited athletic abilities can be just as dominant if he figures things out at the NBA level… that’s the point I’m making.

  • Steve

    That they are not always completely correlated, and we can find examples of great players who are both high reward and safe is not a sign that they aren’t related.

    Nash, even at his age, still has more than enough quickness. There is more to athleticism than straight line speed and hops. Just because they are less obvious doesn’t make guys like Nash unathletic.

  • BrownsFanSF

    Hold on for a minute while I dream about rolling out a Kyrie, Beal, Barnes, TT line-up for the next 8 years…

  • BrownsFanSF

    It would either put us on the track to championship contention, or be an Outside the Lines episode 10 years from now.

  • floydrubino

    what would be great is if we could trade our 2 2nd rounders to sneak up at the end of the first and grab him. Even if we could trade both 2nd rounders and next years 2nd rounder to move up to the mid 20′s I think he is worth it. Some of these guys potentially going in the 20′s could be lottery picks in the past and future. It looks like we are going to get MKG so if we could get Sully and then use our #24 on the best player available this would be a solid draft. Somehow get MKG, Moe Harkless, and Sully. I would take that.

  • Vindictive_Pat

    Guess we’re just going to have to disagree on both accounts.