Amare Stoudemire rumors begin NBA Shopping Season
Much like the Holiday Shopping season that gets started the day after Thanksgiving, the NBA has a shopping season of their own - culminating in the NBA Trade Deadline. This season, that date is February 18th.
The Cavaliers are likely to be major players in the trade market, though the potential of a deal is never a sure thing. Take 2009 for instance. There was plenty of talk about Shaquille O'Neal coming to the Cavaliers only to see it crumble at the last minute. It did end up happening, of course, during the summer, but despite all the smoke a deal never got done.
While the rumors circulating so far this season were rumblings that we have gotten used to in the past - Antawn Jamison, Troy Murphy, et al - the first real salvo was apparently fired last night when Paul Coro from the Arizona Republic reported that the Suns are amping up to trade Amare Stoudemire and the Cavaliers were one of the teams in talks with the Suns.
That shouldn't come as a shock, for a number of reasons.
- The Suns are in some financial distress - they traded Shaq for nothing more than salary relief and have sold a number of first round picks in recent years to avoid paying rookie salaries. As Brian Windhorst says, the Suns have millions of reasons to make a deal for Stoudemire -
Straight up, this type of deal would save the Suns around $3.4 million off their payroll ($6.8 million including luxury tax). However, the Suns currently are a little more than $5 million over the luxury-tax line. It is possible they could then negotiate a buyout with Ilgauskas and get below the tax, which would probably enable such a trade to save them around $10 million in real money. The cash advantage could actually increase because, if the Suns got below the tax line of $69.9 million, they would be able to get their share from the fund created by the tax-paying teams. In other words, it would be worth millions more.
In addition, because of a clause in his contract, Ilgauskas has already been paid about 75 percent of his $11.5 million salary this season. He would be owed a trade kicker of around $2 million, but the Suns could save up to $3 million in the swap from money already paid to Ilgauskas that wouldn't have to come out of their coffers. All of that is subject to negotiation, of course, but the point here is this is a potential deal worth lots of money to Phoenix if they worked all these details out. But, in short, it is complicated.
- Cavs GM Danny Ferry and Suns GM Steve Kerr are former teammates and friends. I'm not saying that Kerr would take a lessor deal from the Cavaliers because of this, but working from a position of familiarity and trust never hurts.
- While there are other teams that have interest in Stoudemire, the Cavaliers are one of the few teams willing to take on the salary, with an intent to try and sign Stoudemire to an extension.
I think the Cavaliers motivations this winter are clear. Instead of waiting until the summer to try and lure free agents to the team to pair with LeBron James, you get the sense that the team would like to bring in a big name NOW, not only to improve the team's chances to win a NBA Title, but to increase their chances to sign that player, along with LeBron James, since they could go over the salary cap to do it.
Of course, in the specific case of Stoudemire, the Cavaliers have to be sure he and Shaq could co-exist. It's no secret that O'Neal and Stoudemire struggled when they were on the court together. Their games really don't support each other and frankly, O'Neal gets in Amare's way.
The Cavaliers have the NBA's best record and play more home games down the stretch than anyone. They are in a great position to once again secure home-court advantage throughout the playoffs. If they are going to make a move to improve the team, they need to make a move sooner rather than later to ensure the team can get into a rhythm. That is, if a move needs to be made at all.
Keep track of the situation over at Bright Side of the Sun
0 recs |
25 comments
|
Comments
You really need three answers for the poll....
Hell Yes, Yes and No. Put me down for “Hell Yes”.
So I told her," I'll be nicer if you try to be smarter!'..That was a mistake.
by Juannieboy on Jan 25, 2010 1:39 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
If we can do it without giving up JJ (I like his potential right now), I say pull the trigger.
Say Z and some consolation, and I’d love it. We don’t want to sacrifice any strong role players off the bench though, in my opinion (i.e. Varejao, Delonte). That’s always been an x-factor that I liked about the Cavs.
by Simmsinns on Jan 25, 2010 2:45 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
From a Suns fans' point of view:
Seriously? J.J. Hickson is about the only real trade chip the Cavs have here. Kerr and Sarver may not have much choice but to trade Stoudemire at this point, but any Cavs deal starts with Hickson.
by jburning on Jan 25, 2010 4:46 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Right. I don’t see any way we could do this trade without JJ. The Suns just aren’t going to give him away for nothing, and JJ is the only young player the Cavs would give up that another team would want.
by Buckeye Brad on Jan 25, 2010 4:54 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
In that case, I’m not entirely sure that I’d give up Z and JJ.
If a deal with JJ requires Z also as a must, then I don’t think it’s worth it. Not only would we lose Shaq’s insurance policy, but the expiring contract as well. Top that with JJ, and I’m against this trade.
by Simmsinns on Jan 25, 2010 6:05 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm sure they'll buy out Z's contract.
he has no use to them but as a way to get closer to being underneath the luxury. Its truthfully the deal the Cavs have been waiting for, since they’ve been trying to shop Z around and get someone to buy him out.
by Marty Mart on Jan 25, 2010 6:20 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Cavs are dying to trade JJ
before the rest of the league realizes that he has some of the worst hands and mental focus in the game.
by hooray on Jan 25, 2010 4:54 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
While were on the subject, here’s a little something I whipped up last season actually, when the exact same rumor was floating around:

by Simmsinns on Jan 25, 2010 3:09 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Fits like a glove
The night is darkest right before the dawn
by Baltimore Warrior on Jan 25, 2010 4:29 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
except that Boobie already has that number
by cavslandrocks on Jan 26, 2010 7:46 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I think it’s obvious that getting Stoudemire would help. The question is what they’d have to give up to get him. JJ Hickson and Z seems like an OK price to pay.
by Cols714 on Jan 25, 2010 4:36 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
I don’t know about that; defense isn’t a strong point for him and that’s what the Cavs are built on (well, that and LBJ). Plus he’s going to be a free agent after this season so he could walk away for nothing. JJ is one of the few young core players this team has and I don’t want to get rid of him for just a 3-month rental.
by Buckeye Brad on Jan 25, 2010 4:51 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I wouldn’t mind getting him for 3 months. Three months of Amare could really help the team win it all. If the Cavs think that Amare can help them more than Hickson over this season, they should make the trade. To hell with the future. One championship is really all I’m asking for.
by Cols714 on Jan 25, 2010 5:02 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
It all depends on how much Amare would improve our team. He didn’t play well with Shaq when they were in Phoenix last year and he’s not good defensively, but he would be another big scorer. If the FO thinks that he can really improve our team then of course I’d be all for it, but if it would risk throwing off our whole system and team defense then I’d be worried.
by Buckeye Brad on Jan 25, 2010 6:02 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I agree it depends on how much he improves the team. If he does though, I don’t see what is wrong with giving up Hickson and Z.
by Cols714 on Jan 25, 2010 6:38 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
One championship is really all I’m asking for.
I can totally understand your stance, but personally, I think even if we won a championship then the team collapsed because we lost Amare and LeBron, I see us as worse off, and I’d rather not have won it all just to keep those guys…. and that’s REALLY hard to say being a die hard Cleveland fan.
Luckily, I don’t think they’d leave IF we won.
by Simmsinns on Jan 25, 2010 6:09 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
The question is
does Shaq re-sign and continue to stabilize Amare’s shortcomings if you win a title. I mean he’ll be able to say he won a ‘ship with the 3 of the best backcourt players of the decade. He’ll really have nothing else to prove. And if he does leave and they stay, who do u sign next since you’ll most likely be capped out.
by Marty Mart on Jan 25, 2010 6:18 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
If the Cavs do this trade and win the title playing the Lakers, Shaq re-signs…how much is the Question…If they lose to the Lakers, I think Shaq walks…maybe retires…If they make the finals and lose to any team but the Lakers, see the first scenario…If They trade Z and get him back in 30 days and win the title it’s 50-50 whether he comes back…If they lose, he retires, unless they keep the team (core) intact. then it’s 25-75 he’d stay..Personally, I think Hickson is replaceable by Jawad IF they can get Wad to play some D without fouling (also Hickson’s biggest problem) and rebound more consistently…The only way I would pull the trigger on this is if they could get a commitment from Amare’ to extend/re-sign AND Shaq and LeBron want it too…..right now, those two guys ARE the team
by cavslandrocks on Jan 26, 2010 7:37 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
and one more Question
you KNOW MB won’t keep him in in late game “defensive battles” except on offense-defense possession changes…so…say they win it all and he and LeBron both re-up and both Shaq and Z return, what happens to Andy’s minutes?
Nice fix to be in unless you’re Varejao
by cavslandrocks on Jan 26, 2010 7:52 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Look, if LBJ leaves, the Cavs are screwed anyways. I say go for the championship now.
by Cols714 on Jan 25, 2010 6:39 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
You'd really rather have one championship
than a good team to cheer for for years to come. Assuming you’re a Cavaliers fan and not a Lebron fan of course.
by Marty Mart on Jan 25, 2010 9:47 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Yes I would rather have one championship. And it’s not about being a Lebron fan more than a Cavs fan. The fact is if Lebron leaves the Cavs are screwed, so why not go for it this year as much as you can?
by Cols714 on Jan 26, 2010 9:14 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Suns fan perspective again:
I really see this is a no-lose trade for the Cavs. The only thing you stand to lose is Hickson. Yes, you trade away Big Z, but the Suns would likely buy him out for the Cavs to get back after 30 days. I really see Z retiring with the Cavs.
If you’re worried about LeBron James leaving after this season anyway, then treat Amare like a rental. Don’t re-sign him until James re-ups. If James doesn’t re-up, then let Amare opt out and walk, as well. If that happens, you guys have LeBron, Amare, AND Shaq all coming off the books at once. That’s a lot of money to work with. Not that that goes anywhere close to making you feel better after losing the greatest player the NBA has seen in years, but still. If James is leaving anyway, it’s better than nothing.
by jburning on Jan 26, 2010 12:39 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Basically all you have to ask yourself is:
Is Amare better than Hickson? Right now, yes. And truthfully, I don’t see Hickson ever becoming the player Amare is. Maybe a better rebounder, though.
Is Amare better than Z right now? Yep, no doubt. Amare shoots just as well from outside and is as good as or better than Z in all other areas.
Is Amare better than Antawn Jamison or other trade options? Maybe not, but his contract is less burdensome (provided you do not re-up him). It’s not like the Cavs need defense. They need more scoring, which is exactly what Amare brings in bunches.
by jburning on Jan 26, 2010 12:42 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Yep
There isn’t much of a downside for the Cavs. If this is the deal, you do it.
by Cols714 on Jan 26, 2010 3:27 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

by 

















