July 31, 2014

NBA Rumors: Cavaliers discussed deal with Kings that would have removed restrictions from first round pick

According to Jason Lloyd, the Cavaliers and Kings had discussions about a deal that would have removed the restrictions surrounding Sacramento’s first round pick owed to the Cavaliers in the Hickson/Casspi deal-

“#Cavs made offer to Sac to remove pick protections from Hickson/Casspi trade, league source said. Deal died with Sac/Hou trade last night” -Jason Lloyd

Those restrictions are as follows-

2013 first round draft pick from Sacramento: Sacramento’s own 2013 first round draft pick to Cleveland (top-13 protected in 2013, top-12 protected in 2014, top-10 protected in 2015, top-10 protected in 2016 and top-10 protected in the 2017 Draft) If Cleveland has not received a first round pick from Sacramento by 2017, then Sacramento shall convey their own 2017 2nd round draft pick to Cleveland provided it is within the top-55 picks. If it is not, then Sacramento’s obligation to Cleveland shall be extinguished. (Cleveland-Sacramento, 6/30/2011)

The deal Lloyd is referring to sent Thomas Robinson to the Rockets and saved the Kings over $3 million dollars in payroll this season.

No details regarding the proposed deal between Cleveland and Sacramento were given, but it is assumed that the Cavs would have taken on salary in exchange for the protections being removed. Sacramento owns the league’s 6th worst record. The Cavaliers currently have the 4th worst record.

[Related: Speights drawing interest, Cavaliers not enticed]

  • JK

    lol wut?

  • Natedawg86

    Stinking Sacramento…ugh…lol
    On the positive note, we didn’t draft Robinson last year

  • Jaker

    Honestly, we should try trying the SAC pick. I don’t think they’re gunna be all that good over the next five years, especially with the move lingering in the backs of their heads. There’s a good chance that that pick becomes a 2nd rounder

  • mgbode

    hey, anytime you can give up on the #5 overall pick halfway through his first season to save yourself a few million $$$, you just have to do it.

    he’s not been great and I didn’t like him for the draft, but his per36 #’s aren’t horrible and his FG% may pickup as he learns to play in the NBA (see Vucevic 1st-2nd year progression). but, that’s not as important as saving $$$ when you are going to sell the team anyway I guess.

  • Harv 21

    right. Never a great sign for the team or player when a high first-rounder is traded in his second year.

  • mgbode

    Robinson is a rookie. The gave up on him after 51 games.

    They also are reportedly dangling Tyreke Evans to save more $$$ for the impending sale. If so, given our struggles at SF, I’d like to get him for a 2nd rounder.

  • Harv 21

    Grant is lurking like a payroll lender, sniffing out the desperate. Worked once this year, and maybe again before 4:00 today.

    Gotta love cap room and a rich owner understanding the value of these type of expenditures. Now Grant, find that second star with the picks or this won’t amount to much of a strategy.

  • Harv 21

    My bad, forgot he’s still a rook. Even worse. I’d say yes to Evans for a second rounder before they could finish the question.

  • Natedawg86

    Rumor is that Robinson HATES rain. Makes sense to me

  • mgbode

    i would have a dramatic pause and see if we can get some of the restrictions to that draft pick they owe us lifted. i mean, let’s take full advantage :)

  • mgbode

    and here I thought they were going to try to get as many of Coach Cal’s former players on the same team to lure him back to the NBA.

  • Steve

    I love your commentary, but I really think you have to give up on the per-36 minute numbers. Robinson isn’t good enough to stay on the court for 36 minutes, and won’t be anytime soon. And the per-possession numbers we have now are much more useful in telling us how efficient a guy is when he is on the court.

    I wonder if the new owners had any input on this trade though.

  • The_Real_Shamrock

    Grant continues to show or at least it’s reported as so, to be working to improve the team by any means necessary.

  • mgbode

    understood on the per possession numbers. i think those are useful as well.

    the main point in whichever form you use is that it has been shown by many that if they get more minutes, then those numbers usually hold (or can even improve). andrew/jacob have had articles on it here as well as plenty of other sites showing the same.

    most bigs only play 30min, but that doesn’t matter. it’s the per-minute (or per possession) numbers that matter and that is what basketball-reference gives.

    we may find out soon with Thomas Robinson though. With Houston trading away 3 bigs, they will need him to play some good minutes (my guess is 25-30 per game).

  • Steve

    Per-minute numbers should have been trashed the moment per-possession numbers came out. The former makes too many assumptions that we don’t simply just don’t need to by using the latter.

    I’ve seen this numbers on players getting more minutes. They’re heavily skewed toward guys who were very good in limited minutes and developed into better players. Using them to project numbers on to guys who are struggling is a much different thing.

  • mgbode

    is there a good site you use for those per-min numbers? i had high hopes for nba.com/stats, but it requires a bit more work to get the numbers than I want. i like to have a site where i can just type in the players name and have everything come up in a table (like basketball-reference.com). it makes it easy/quick for discussion purposes. haven’t found a good site for such yet.

    there are also some studies on PF and C FG% increase from year1 to year2. Vucevic is an example I discussed yesterday here.

    as far as guys who are struggling, if they struggle per minute, then they will struggle with more minutes as well. see Speights with his FG% this season. the rebounds, assists, TOs, etc. tend to remain relatively flat.

    the relationship between efficiency and usage rate is interesting but I think alot of it can come down to having more opportunities for easy buckets. i think that curve will dropoff quickly at some point if the usage-rate gets too high though.

  • Steve

    Vucevic went from 60% of his shots being jumpers to 44%. That was a huge difference for him.

    And I won’t use per-min numbers unless I absolutely have to, but I’ll peruse 82games, hoopdata, basketballvalue along with b-ref.

  • Jaker

    *trading not trying. Silly me.

  • Yup

    He avg less than 5 points a game and has a PER around 10. Come on…

  • mgbode

    (sorry steve)
    per36 are 11pts/11rb
    he’s a rookie 51 games in
    he was the #5 overall pick

    terrible FO that dumps a guy that quickly. could you imagine if Grant traded Waiters for Wesley Johnson?

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000481218860 Jeff Rickel

    They still may trade it. Thing to remember is that even this year the Kings are only a couple of games away from being the 10-11th worst team. At 11 there is a chance for them to pick 14th. I don’t expect that to happen, but once it gets to top ten protection they can get the #11 pick if the Cavs finish anywhere between 9th worst or better.

    The Cavs have three years where this can happen and the pick could be #11 or #12. Imagine a more mature and developed Cavs team with some free agent additions and all the extra draft picks. We have another Miami pick due after this year that could end up being quite high if the team falls apart after next season – that one is unprotected in 2017, but only top ten protected beginning in 2015. We get Memphis’s pick in 2015 or 2016 if it’s in the back end of the lottery. Then Sacramento and our own picks – and the King’s pick is most likely to be 11-14.

    It’s quite conceivable to sign a free agent in 2013 or 2014 and see the Heat diminished, but only enough for the pick to be top 20. So in 2015 we could have four first rounders, all in the 6-25 range.

    I think the Cavs will end up trading some of that – that’s one reason why we have acquired so many picks. I think they are there for compensation for sign-and-trade deals. That way we do not have to give up our own picks and have extras. The Cavs low payroll also is a help because they are well below the luxury tax threshold and sign and trades can no longer be done if they are $4 million above the threshold after the trade. We’ll be well below that.

  • Steve

    Wesley Johnson plus Patrick Patterson and Toney Douglass, you mean. You don’t get to ignore the two best players going back to Sacramento.