# AV signed by Memphis?



## Pioneer10 (Sep 30, 2004)

> As expected, the Cavaliers may have a difficult decision upcoming with free agent big man Anderson Varejao.
> According to an NBA executive, Varejao has been presented with a hefty contract offer in excess of the league's mid-level exception, which is around $6 million for next season.
> Such an offer could be for up to five years and around $40 million or more. Only a handful of teams have cap space to make such an offer, but the one likely after Varejao is the Memphis Grizzlies.
> An active player and rebounder, he fits with the up-tempo style of new coach Marc Iavaroni.
> ...


http://www.ohio.com/mld/ohio/sports/basketball/nba/cleveland_cavaliers/17449461.htm


----------



## Ruff Draft (Nov 21, 2004)

So it'll be around 8M a year. I don't think the Cavs should be afraid to match that. He is a key piece to the team, and letting him go will hurt.


----------



## different_13 (Aug 30, 2005)

IMO, the Cleveland management has to ask themselves this - if they resign AV, are they going to be able to make the finals in 2 years. 
With all the roster turnovers in the East this year, Cleveland has to IMPROVE, not just stay put. As they don't have the cap to add players, they should probably resign Varejao.
But even if they do, they still need a trade for that missing piece. I don't think they can repeat their performance this coming year with last year's roster.


----------



## Ruff Draft (Nov 21, 2004)

Well if you look at it, only the lottery teams are becoming that much better. Cleveland & Chicago have young stars that will still grow, but Detroit & Miami are getting older and need to add some key pieces. Cleveland should try and keep both Sasha & AV, and look to sign someone like Mo Pete. Of course the roleplayers are getting older, but Lebron is still the King.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

Yeah with the Cavs cap situation, really we have to re-sign at least AV. We got lucky with Drew last summer, I think Danny Ferry just needs to look at it like that. Like the total amount we'll be paying for Drew and Anderson is alright.

Problem might be Drew dealing with his backup making more money than him.

I still think Andy needs to be a starter here.


----------



## different_13 (Aug 30, 2005)

If AV makes a decent improvement in his skills and production, would that open the door to dealing any two of Gooden/Hughes/Jones/Snow for a new sidekick to LBJ? If we assume Z starts, AV starts, LBJ and Pavlovic start, would adding a high-calibre pg be worth giving up some of those assets?


----------



## JoeD (Sep 2, 2004)

From a pure basketball standpoint AV should stick with Lebron.


----------



## Benedict_Boozer (Jul 16, 2004)

No choice. Ferry has to match the offer. 

Worst case scenario should be sign and trade.


----------



## Pioneer10 (Sep 30, 2004)

Benedict_Boozer said:


> No choice. Ferry has to match the offer.
> 
> Worst case scenario should be sign and trade.


Yep.

Now if Gilbert would really open the checkbook I wonder and get Darko that would be interesting. Resign AV/Get Darko and add on trading Gooden for some backcourt help? That would be nice. We'd be in luxury tax hell but with the junk Paxson's years and the bomb that Ferry's FA class we're left with little options


----------



## Damian Necronamous (Jun 10, 2002)

$8M per year for a guy who doesn't even get 7/7?

Ummm....wow....


----------



## Larry Hughes for Retirement (Jul 5, 2004)

Damian Necronamous said:


> $8M per year for a guy who doesn't even get 7/7?
> 
> Ummm....wow....


Clearly an NBA fan that just checks the boxscores and stats. To advance fans, there are intangibles that are not on the sheet, that clearly deserving of that money.


----------



## TucsonClip (Sep 2, 2002)

If Memphis is going to dish out 8 mil per...

Sign

and

Trade

Kyle Lowry and Hakim Warrick

The new reports are that Memphis might be after Darko. If true that could be a huge break for the Cavs. Other than Memphis paying 8 mil per, I dont know what other team is crazy enough to do that.


----------



## TucsonClip (Sep 2, 2002)

Larry Hughes for Retirement said:


> Clearly an NBA fan that just checks the boxscores and stats. To advance fans, there are intangibles that are not on the sheet, that clearly deserving of that money.


Role players dont deserve 8 mil per.


----------



## Pioneer10 (Sep 30, 2004)

AV's numbers are deflated because he splits minutes with Gooden as a starter he averaged somewhere around 17 and 12 and was very good. He's the player that basically plays in the 4th. To the Cavs he's more then a role player.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

Plus AV and Drew are the frontcourt once Z retires. So if we lose one of them it's a hole we have to fill. Whereas if we re-sign him the frontcourt is taken care of for the next dozen years.

And like has been mentioned. His numbers are deflated mostly because he is not a starter. He is a finisher though. Definite game changer for the Cavs.


----------



## TucsonClip (Sep 2, 2002)

Yeah he is great in the 4th because of his defense, but you can pickup another guy who can score 13 per 48, rebound, and defend for less than 8 mil per.


----------



## cpawfan (Jun 20, 2004)

TucsonClip said:


> Yeah he is great in the 4th because of his defense, but you can pickup another guy who can score 13 per 48, rebound, and defend for less than 8 mil per.


Start naming them


----------



## cpawfan (Jun 20, 2004)

TucsonClip said:


> Role players dont deserve 8 mil per.


Opportunity cost has to be looked at. The Cavs can't just give an 8 million starting salary to just anyone. Plus, needing to use the MLE on their 3rd big eliminates the ability to address the backcourt.


----------



## TucsonClip (Sep 2, 2002)

cpawfan said:


> Start naming them


You arent going to get as many in FA, but there are players out there who can do what Varejao does in 23 minutes per game, or atleast do some things better besides defend. These players do not cost 8 million dollars per either. 

What I am getting at is that if AV doesnt progress he turns into another overpaid bigman who is one dimensional. If they sign and trade him, they can address their other needs and still have their MLE exception to use.


----------



## TucsonClip (Sep 2, 2002)

cpawfan said:


> Opportunity cost has to be looked at. The Cavs can't just give an 8 million starting salary to just anyone. Plus, needing to use the MLE on their 3rd big eliminates the ability to address the backcourt.


Exactly, they cant afford for AV to be a bust and then be stuck with his 8 mil per year and Hughes' huge deal, not to mention some of the other contracts they have.

Honestly a deal for Lowry, Warrick, and fillers isnt half bad for AV, if that were a possibility.


----------



## cpawfan (Jun 20, 2004)

TucsonClip said:


> You arent going to get as many in FA, but there are players out there who can do what Varejao does in 23 minutes per game, or atleast do some things better besides defend. These players do not cost 8 million dollars per either.
> 
> What I am getting at is that if AV doesnt progress he turns into another overpaid bigman who is one dimensional. If they sign and trade him, they can address their other needs and still have their MLE exception to use.


Come on now, name them and if they aren't free agents, how would the Cavs acquire such a player?


----------



## TucsonClip (Sep 2, 2002)

cpawfan said:


> Come on now, name them and if they aren't free agents, how would the Cavs acquire such a player?


These are guys who arent going to cost 8 million per, are realistically atainable, can score more than 13 per 48, and can provide some solid rebounding and or defense.

David Lee
Hakim Warrick (would be a good fit for the style of play LeBron wants to run)
Ike Diogu
Chris Wilcox
Stromile Swift (ok, hes not great but he scores more and isnt a terrible rebounder)
Craig Smith
SAR
Ryan Gomes
Marvin Williams
Antonio McDyess
Jason Maxiell
Josh Boone
Paul Millsap
Juwan Howard
Ronny Turiaf
Darko
Nick Collison
Etan Thomas
Renaldo Balkman
Mikki Moore
Reggie Evans


You may not agree that these guys are better then AV, and im not saying they all are. However, for their price and skill set they are a better value at under 8 mil next year than AV is at 8+.


----------



## Pioneer10 (Sep 30, 2004)

Come on some of those guys are on the list are laugable:
Turiaf? That guy maybe the worst help defender in the league
Swift? Absolutely sucks. He can't play PF next to Yao and Tmac - he's nowhere near AV
Wilcox? He ain't going anywhere - the Sonics need size
Balkman? is nowhere close to AV's size
Evans? Mr. No offense
Howard? AV is 10 years younger then him
Boone? This is a joke. Boone was destroyed by the Cavs frontline


----------



## cpawfan (Jun 20, 2004)

First, rookie contracts eventually expire, so that is silly to put them on the list

David Lee * - He isn't obtainable* 
Hakim Warrick (would be a good fit for the style of play LeBron wants to run) * - He is a major step down on defense*
Ike Diogu * - He is a major step down on defense*
Chris Wilcox * - He is a major step down on defense*
Stromile Swift (ok, hes not great but he scores more and isnt a terrible rebounder) * - Just ridiculous*
Craig Smith * - He is a major step down on defense*
SAR * - He is a major step down on defense and he is having knee problems*
Ryan Gomes * - He is a major step down on defense*
Marvin Williams * - He is a major step down on defense*
Antonio McDyess * - And the Pistons would trade him to the Cavs why?*
Jason Maxiell * - And the Pistons would trade him to the Cavs why?*
Josh Boone * - Major step down in all areas, including hair*
Paul Millsap * - He isn't obtainable*
Juwan Howard * - Major step down in all areas*
Ronny Turiaf * - Major step down in all areas*
Darko * - He wants more money than AV*
Nick Collison * - Major step down in all areas*
Etan Thomas * - expecting him to stay healthy for every season is asking too much*
Renaldo Balkman * - He can't play center*
Mikki Moore * - Major step down on defense*
Reggie Evans * - Major step down in all areas except rebounding*


The only obtainable player on your list that is worth anything is Etan Thomas. The next best bet is Reggie Evans, but he is horrible on offense


----------



## TucsonClip (Sep 2, 2002)

TucsonClip said:


> These are guys who arent going to cost 8 million per, are realistically atainable, *can score more than 13 per 48, and can provide some solid rebounding and or defense*.





> You may not agree that these guys are better then AV, and im not saying they all are. However, for their price and skill set they are a better value at under 8 mil next year than AV is at 8+.


..


----------



## Larry Hughes for Retirement (Jul 5, 2004)

If charges taken were under the list of steals then AV would be worth 8 million it is a stat that is never used. He around 1.5 a game, that could almost lead the league in steals, he was much more than a role player. Brian Cardinal is a role player, AV is a spark, a guy a shoulder injury away from being our starter.


----------



## TucsonClip (Sep 2, 2002)

Again, I never said these guys were better defenders. They all score more per 48 than AV does, they all are decent rebounders (some better than the others, even AV).

Also, why is it silly to put rookie contract on the list because they expire? All contract expire...

What I am getting at in my list of players is that for their price, they are a better bargain (their per 48 stats vs. AV's per 48 stats). Obviously they arent all going to be better defenders, but there is a reason why teams are not lining up at the door to pay 8 mil per for a 20-30 min per game defender.

On any roster, 8 mil per season is a lot for AV. These guys put up similar per 48 stats, if not better, and most cost no where near 8 million starting. I never said they were all better, but that for their price compared to AV's they would put up similar numbers and play the same amount of minutes.


----------



## GNG (Aug 17, 2002)

TucsonClip said:


> If Memphis is going to dish out 8 mil per...
> 
> Sign
> 
> ...


Yucky.

I'd rather have Lowry than Varejao at the same price, let alone Varejao making 10 times more over the life of the contract.


----------



## TucsonClip (Sep 2, 2002)

Larry Hughes for Retirement said:


> Brian Cardinal is a role player, AV is a spark, a guy a shoulder injury away from being our starter.


Shane Battier is a better verion of AV, except he plays on the perimeter. Is he a role player? I would say so.

Mikki Moore is a more productive, while older, version of AV. Would you consider him a role player? I would.

Also, how do charges taken as a stat increase AV's value, production, or contribution to the Cavs?


----------



## TucsonClip (Sep 2, 2002)

Rawse said:


> Yucky.
> 
> I'd rather have Lowry than Varejao at the same price, let alone Varejao making 10 times more over the life of the contract.


I would too...


----------



## TucsonClip (Sep 2, 2002)

Also, another question...

Would you guys take AV at 8 mil+ or Nick Collison at around or below the MLE?


----------



## Larry Hughes for Retirement (Jul 5, 2004)

TucsonClip said:


> Shane Battier is a better verion of AV, except he plays on the perimeter. Is he a role player? I would say so.
> 
> Mikki Moore is a more productive, while older, version of AV. Would you consider him a role player? I would.
> 
> Also, how do charges taken as a stat increase AV's value, production, or contribution to the Cavs?


He created so many turnovers with those charges, how does it not contribute to his production. If he had 100+ steals it would be a big conversation, charges, is a change of possession just like a steal. Its a big momentum change, I'll give you that Shane Battier could be a better version, but thats about it. But he is not in the talks, the talk is about, how we sign or don't sign AV.


----------



## TucsonClip (Sep 2, 2002)

Larry Hughes for Retirement said:


> He created so many turnovers with those charges, how does it not contribute to his production. If he had 100+ steals it would be a big conversation, charges, is a change of possession just like a steal. Its a big momentum change, I'll give you that Shane Battier could be a better version, but thats about it. But he is not in the talks, the talk is about, how we sign or don't sign AV.


.... Because he is already doing that and its not a stat. So why would making charges taken a stat then increase AV's production or value? 

My opinion on this, even though im not a Cavs fan, is that I would sign AV for the MLE. However, for 8+ million I would explore my sign and trade options.


----------



## -33- (Aug 6, 2002)

I'll throw my two-cents in here....

Varejao is a role player. He'll never be a good scorer, not now, not ever. He's a good defender, hustle player who hits the boards hard and does all the "intangables" for his team to be successful. 

But sorry, he isn't worth $8 mil starting salary. 

With the Cavs salary situation, why would you overpay for another role player? You can find a guy to do the same role as AV (defend, rebound, hustle) for only a few million. A guy like Mikki Moore, a career long scrub from the D-League, can step in and do the exact role for NJ that AV does for the Cavs. The Nets just drafted an "insurance" guy Sean Williams who, if he stays clean, can be as good if not better than AV (plus a better shotblocker). Haslem was an undrafted player who filled that role for Miami (who is better than AV, and even after his payday, doesn't command $8 mil). Reggie Evans fills that role, makes around $4 mil. I'd love to hear how AV is worth millions more than these guys who fill the same roles for successful teams.


----------



## Larry Hughes for Retirement (Jul 5, 2004)

Shaq_Diesel said:


> I'll throw my two-cents in here....
> 
> Varejao is a role player. He'll never be a good scorer, not now, not ever. He's a good defender, hustle player who hits the boards hard and does all the "intangables" for his team to be successful.
> 
> ...


First off, Memphis has not offered anything yet, and Cavaliers haven't matched anything yet. We are just assuming Memphis goes with 8 million a year. But we don't have time to wait and see if an un-drafted player like Haslem will contribute, we need to win now. And thats exactly what Dan Gilbert and Danny Ferry might be thinking. Zydrunas is not getting any younger and the only true center left in the East is shaq, (too defend). We could sign AV and start him and Gooden, or at least give them the majority of the minutes together. Marshall is all but washed up, we can't let AV walk and not get someone else too fill his void, we then have taken a "big" step back, while a lot lot lot of the teams in the East have taken a step forward.


----------



## Brandname (May 24, 2006)

Ultimately, it's not really what a player is "worth".

How many players in the league actually earn what they're worth? Not very many, and heck the most fair contracts in the league might be the max contracts that players like Lebron and Wade have. The average players always get overpaid on the market, so you're not going to be able to build a very good team only paying players what they're "worth". 

When you're trying to compete for a championship, sometimes it's worth it to overplay players to keep them in the hopes of adding just enough to get you over the hump. 

So I'm sure the question that Ferry and Gilbert are debating right now isn't really whether AV the player is worth 8 million/year. He's one of the most important players on the team, but he's not a great scorer and he doesn't intimidate near the rim, despite his ability to take charges. He's not worth 8 million just as a player. However, that doesn't mean it's not worth matching that kind of a contract. 8 million per is probably right on the edge of what we're willing to match because we'd just be letting him go otherwise (not considering what we could get in a S&T). 

This is a tough situation, and I'm glad I don't have to make the call. With the new cap figures, we're going to be going well into the luxury tax if we want to keep AV and Sasha, so if they both come back, Ferry will have to figure out a clever way of improving this team.

We're good enough to win the East, but I think it's pretty obvious we're not good enough right now to win a championship. We have too many holes (mostly on offense) that can be exploited by a great team like the Spurs. To compete this year, it's going to take a lot more than just resigning AV and Sasha, and that's where the pressure is really going to load on Ferry. We don't have a whole lot of options given our contracts situation.


----------



## Damian Necronamous (Jun 10, 2002)

TucsonClip said:


> Also, another question...
> 
> Would you guys take AV at 8 mil+ or Nick Collison at around or below the MLE?


Not a Cavs fan, but I'd take Collison over Varejao, period.


----------



## Pioneer10 (Sep 30, 2004)

We keep drumming away at this but *for the Cavs* again for the hundreth, AV is a much more then a roleplayer. He plays in the fourth ahead of both our starters almost every single game for a reason. His numbers aren't elevated because again for the hundreth time he's got to split minutes with the starters for the non crunch time numbers.

His PER and 48min numbers don't look as good because it doesn't include charges and defense plus energy. Replace any of those guys you listed on the Cavs and with almost every single one of them we become worse. Considering we just came off a Finals run and don't have cap space and don't have draft picks and don't have very good tradeable assets, AV is simply worth more to the Cavs then other teams. Lost AV and we have to replace not only him but figure out away to improve at our other spots. 

If Lowry was such an asset why did Memphis pick a PG in one of the deepest drafts in years?


----------



## Pioneer10 (Sep 30, 2004)

TucsonClip said:


> Also, another question...
> 
> Would you guys take AV at 8 mil+ or Nick Collison at around or below the MLE?


Umm because we have an owner willing to go over the cap.

We sign Collison who is worse then AV and then we have no MLE to add a perimeter player or a strong post defender = Cavs team getting worse

Sign AV (even overpay - i.e. AV is more valuable to the Cavs then other teams) and then use that MLE to go after perimter players (i.e. Navarro) = improvement


----------



## Larry Hughes for Retirement (Jul 5, 2004)

Darko has done nothing so far in the league and gets 7 mil a year? and it's insane for us to think AV can't get 8 mill?


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

well now that Memphis has got Darko, doesn't that mean there's nobody out there to give Andy 8?


----------



## cpawfan (Jun 20, 2004)

Shaq_Diesel said:


> I'll throw my two-cents in here....
> 
> Varejao is a role player. He'll never be a good scorer, not now, not ever. He's a good defender, hustle player who hits the boards hard and does all the "intangables" for his team to be successful.
> 
> ...


Mikki can't do what AV does because his defense is light years behind AV's. Additionally, Moore's role for the Nets was different than what AV's role is for the Cavs.


----------



## cpawfan (Jun 20, 2004)

TucsonClip said:


> ..


Your couching of those players doesn't hold water. In almost every case of an obtainable player, the Cavs would be worse than they would be with AV and not have the resources to make up that difference and address their other needs.

As far as the rookie contracts, the point is that they have artificially set the "value" of the player. Of course every player on a rookie contract is going to be making less than 8 million a season. That is as relevant as saying Dwight Howard won't make 8 million next season, so AV shouldn't either.


----------



## -33- (Aug 6, 2002)

Larry Hughes for Retirement said:


> Darko has done nothing so far in the league and gets 7 mil a year? and it's insane for us to think AV can't get 8 mill?


But a guy who averaged 7pts/7reb in his best season is??

Darko 8pts/6reb/2blk this year, and 8pts/4reb/2blk last year. 

With a much higher ceiling than Varejao, Darko is worth that money b/c he brings more to the table than AV. Theres a reason reportedly 25 teams were after Darko this summer, and he went #2 for his potential. He hasn't lived up to his Draft hype, but he's young, and basically like a high schooler coming into the league. He's getting better every year, how much better is Varejao really going to get?


----------



## TucsonClip (Sep 2, 2002)

Pioneer10 said:


> We keep drumming away at this but *for the Cavs* again for the hundreth, AV is a much more then a roleplayer. He plays in the fourth ahead of both our starters almost every single game for a reason. His numbers aren't elevated because again for the hundreth time he's got to split minutes with the starters for the non crunch time numbers.


We know that you guys keep saying he is much more valueable to the Cavs than a role player. He is a role player, he isnt anywhere near a star and is really a boarder line starter. With all the bad contracts the Cavs have, AV is another bad contract to slug around. 8 mil starting and if he doesnt improve much on offense he is another overpaid player on the Cavs. Sure he brings lots of enegery and defense, but you dont need to pay 8 million dollars per year for energy and defense for 25-30 mins per game.



> His PER and 48min numbers don't look as good because it doesn't include charges and defense plus energy. Replace any of those guys you listed on the Cavs and with almost every single one of them we become worse. Considering we just came off a Finals run and don't have cap space and don't have draft picks and don't have very good tradeable assets, AV is simply worth more to the Cavs then other teams. Lost AV and we have to replace not only him but figure out away to improve at our other spots.


The 48 min numbers I am looking at are rebounding and scoring. Charges taken, stat or not does not increase his potential or value at all. Sure the energy factor means a lot to the Cavs, but you cant start paying guys tons of money for energy. Now I know that the Cavs can match AV and then use the MLE. They could easily trade AV for a perimeter player or another post man and still use the MLE.



> If Lowry was such an asset why did Memphis pick a PG in one of the deepest drafts in years?


I never said Lowry was such an asset. He would solve some problems for the Cavs though.


----------



## TucsonClip (Sep 2, 2002)

Pioneer10 said:


> Umm because we have an owner willing to go over the cap.
> 
> We sign Collison who is worse then AV and then we have no MLE to add a perimeter player or a strong post defender = Cavs team getting worse
> 
> Sign AV (even overpay - i.e. AV is more valuable to the Cavs then other teams) and then use that MLE to go after perimter players (i.e. Navarro) = improvement


We know he is willing to go over the cap. However, you cant keep going over the cap and adding terrible contracts. It kills the possibility of needed additions to your roster.

Well, if Collison was a FA this year, you could get him for less and he puts up better numbers across the board than AV. You could then sign and trade AV for the position of need (PG/SG/SF).


----------



## TucsonClip (Sep 2, 2002)

Larry Hughes for Retirement said:


> Darko has done nothing so far in the league and gets 7 mil a year? and it's insane for us to think AV can't get 8 mill?


Darko's upside is much greater than AV. Darko is a decent defender and has offensive skills that can improve. AV is a rebounder/hustle guy who has no offense at all.

I would give Darko 7 mil everyday of the week over AV at 8 mil.


----------



## -33- (Aug 6, 2002)

Can we please stop using the "if charges were a stat, then AV's value goes up" as an excuse for his value?

It's not a stat, and really why does it matter if it's a stat? It doesn't change what he brings to the table - defense, rebounding, hustle, and no offense - right?


----------



## TucsonClip (Sep 2, 2002)

cpawfan said:


> Your couching of those players doesn't hold water. In almost every case of an obtainable player, the Cavs would be worse than they would be with AV and not have the resources to make up that difference and address their other needs.


You think the Cavs would be that much worse with one of those players at a far less salary with similar if not better stats? How would they not have the same resources? If they re-sign AV how long do you think Gooden stays on the roster? They still have Sasha to worry about, who could be another S&T, if you trade AV for one of those players somehow (who wuld want him at 8 mil per?) you can fill a need and still have you MLE.



> As far as the rookie contracts, the point is that they have artificially set the "value" of the player. Of course every player on a rookie contract is going to be making less than 8 million a season. That is as relevant as saying Dwight Howard won't make 8 million next season, so AV shouldn't either.


That isnt what im saying. I said ever contract runs out, rookie or not. I also said those players still on a rookie deal who put up similar numbers give the Cavs more flexibility, not to mention they can still re-sign them and go over the cap. Im not sure where the Dwight Howard logic came into play. The difference between Dwight and AV is that Dwight deserves his contract. Can you tell me that when some of these rookies come up for new contracts, AV deserves more money than them because he gives the Cavs energy and defense in the 4th quarter?


----------



## TucsonClip (Sep 2, 2002)

The whole thing with, "if charges taken were a stat", makes no sense at all. AV took all those charges last season and it wasnt an official stat. So if charges taken becomes an official stat, he deserves his 8 mil or that makes him a better player?

That is like me saying, if the NBA had a spectacular dunk stat, Josh Smith would be worth more money.


----------



## Pioneer10 (Sep 30, 2004)

TucsonClip said:


> We know he is willing to go over the cap. However, you cant keep going over the cap and adding terrible contracts. It kills the possibility of needed additions to your roster.
> 
> Well, if Collison was a FA this year, you could get him for less and he puts up better numbers across the board than AV. You could then sign and trade AV for the position of need (PG/SG/SF).


AV is not a terrible contract for 7-8 million a year. Not a good contract necessarily but not terrible. Rashard Lewis is terrible. Larry Hughes has a terrible contract: AV wouldn't fall in that category (7 foot 24 years who have shown half of what AV have gotten better deals)

And Collison's numbers are not better across the board: he play more minutes then AV and there per possesion numbers are essentially equal and they don't count AV's big advantages in defense The fact of the matter is Collison is not as good as AV. So we degrade the frontcourt with you're option while improving the backcourt.


----------



## Pioneer10 (Sep 30, 2004)

TucsonClip said:


> The whole thing with, "if charges taken were a stat", makes no sense at all. AV took all those charges last season and it wasnt an official stat. So if charges taken becomes an official stat, he deserves his 8 mil or that makes him a better player?
> 
> That is like me saying, if the NBA had a spectacular dunk stat, Josh Smith would be worth more money.


Ludicrous argument: dunk equals 2 points just as another shot that's not a 3 pointers

Charge equals foul on the other team AND change of possesion: it's just as good as steals/blocks which are counted in the official stats


----------



## -33- (Aug 6, 2002)

Pioneer10 said:


> AV is not a terrible contract for 7-8 million a year. Not a good contract necessarily but not terrible. Rashard Lewis is terrible. Larry Hughes has a terrible contract: AV wouldn't fall in that category (7 foot 24 years who have shown half of what AV have gotten better deals)
> 
> And Collison's numbers are not better across the board: he play more minutes then AV and there per possesion numbers are essentially equal and they don't count AV's big advantages in defense The fact of the matter is Collison is not as good as AV. So we degrade the frontcourt with you're option while improving the backcourt.


Out of curiousity, how much have you even seen Collison play?


----------



## Pioneer10 (Sep 30, 2004)

Shaq_Diesel said:


> Out of curiousity, how much have you even seen Collison play?


I live on the West Coast, I've seen Seatlle play plenty of times: Collison isn't that good


----------



## GNG (Aug 17, 2002)

Pioneer10 said:


> If Lowry was such an asset why did Memphis pick a PG in one of the deepest drafts in years?


Because Lowry missed 72 games last year with a broken wrist and our other point guard is a 5'9 amputee?


----------



## TucsonClip (Sep 2, 2002)

Pioneer10 said:


> AV is not a terrible contract for 7-8 million a year. Not a good contract necessarily but not terrible. Rashard Lewis is terrible. Larry Hughes has a terrible contract: AV wouldn't fall in that category (7 foot 24 years who have shown half of what AV have gotten better deals)
> 
> And Collison's numbers are not better across the board: he play more minutes then AV and there per possesion numbers are essentially equal and they don't count AV's big advantages in defense The fact of the matter is Collison is not as good as AV. So we degrade the frontcourt with you're option while improving the backcourt.


Ok that is fair, its not a good contract, but not terrible. However, if you downgrade in the front court, where AV doesnt even start and you upgrade in the backcourt by picking up a decent PG, is that making your team worse? I would say they are better off with a decent PG over AV.


----------



## Pioneer10 (Sep 30, 2004)

The other problem with the Collison argument is this his contract is not cheap by any stretch:
<table border="0" bordercolor="#ffffff" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="1" width="650"><tbody><tr bgcolor="#ffffff"><td bgcolor="#cccccc" nowrap="nowrap" valign="top">$5,750,000 ​ </td> <td bgcolor="#cccccc" nowrap="nowrap" valign="top">$6,250,000 ​ </td> <td bgcolor="#cccccc" nowrap="nowrap" valign="top">$6,250,000 ​ </td> <td bgcolor="#cccccc" nowrap="nowrap" valign="top">$6,750,000 ​ </td> <td bgcolor="#cccccc" nowrap="nowrap" valign="top">
</td></tr></tbody></table>
He's getting above MLE money already for 4 more years!!!


----------



## TucsonClip (Sep 2, 2002)

Pioneer10 said:


> Ludicrous argument: dunk equals 2 points just as another shot that's not a 3 pointers


What are you talking about? My point is, Smith has highlight reel dunks, they count as two points. AV takes a lot of charges they count as a turnover and a foul. So how, by adding charges taken or spectacular dunks as a statistic, does that make either player better or more worthy of more money?



> Charge equals foul on the other team AND change of possesion: it's just as good as steals/blocks which are counted in the official stats


Exactly, so if they charges taken to a stat, something AV already does its just not officaly a stat, he is worth more money?


----------



## TucsonClip (Sep 2, 2002)

Pioneer10 said:


> The other problem with the Collison argument is this his contract is not cheap by any stretch:
> <table border="0" bordercolor="#ffffff" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="1" width="650"><tbody><tr bgcolor="#ffffff"><td bgcolor="#cccccc" nowrap="nowrap" valign="top">$5,750,000 ​ </td> <td bgcolor="#cccccc" nowrap="nowrap" valign="top">$6,250,000 ​ </td> <td bgcolor="#cccccc" nowrap="nowrap" valign="top">$6,250,000 ​ </td> <td bgcolor="#cccccc" nowrap="nowrap" valign="top">$6,750,000 ​ </td> <td bgcolor="#cccccc" nowrap="nowrap" valign="top">
> </td></tr></tbody></table>
> He's getting above MLE money already for 4 more years!!!


And for his production, which is equal if not better except defending 1 on 1, he makes possibly 2 mil less per year than AV (at 8 mil).


----------



## Brandname (May 24, 2006)

I agree that Darko has a higher ceiling that AV, but there's no reason to believe that Andy can't improve his offensive game. He'll never be a great offensive player, but with enough practice, he could develop a good midrange jumper like Mikki Moore (although his is _really _good). If he could get that down, he would truly be a player of great value. 

He's shown the ability to step outside and shoot during the WCs, but he's not given that freedom on the Cavs right now (probably for good reason). He's actually shown to be pretty effective as our starter. As a starter, he averaged 12.0 points and 11.3 rebounds per game. Not a star, but not Ben Wallace numbers on offense. He's definitely capable of putting at least a few points on the board when it's a part of his role. 

People keep saying that we could easily replace him with someone just as effective for pretty cheap, but I'm not sure that's true. Mostly because there are maybe 2 or 3 other players in the league that consistently play with as much hustle as Anderson does. One of his biggest contributions is that on every other possession he bats the ball back out to the perimeter for another rebound. Which is something that doesn't show up in the statistics at all. So looking at pts/48 and reb/48 doesn't address the entire reason we would match a big contract.


----------



## -33- (Aug 6, 2002)

Pioneer10 said:


> I live on the West Coast, I've seen Seatlle play plenty of times: Collison isn't that good


OK....well I live in Ohio, and I've seen the Cavs play too many times: players like Varejao are found all over the league, for significantly less than $8 mil per. Good role player, but not worth anywhere near $8 mil.


----------



## Pioneer10 (Sep 30, 2004)

TucsonClip said:


> What are you talking about? My point is, Smith has highlight reel dunks, they count as two points. AV takes a lot of charges they count as a turnover and a foul. So how, by adding charges taken or spectacular dunks as a statistic, does that make either player better or more worthy of more money?


Ummm: let's see you're comparing player A and player B. Poster X states that there stats from a regular (i.e. every other NBA site other then 82games.com) site states that player A is equal to player B because there stats look similar. But taking a closer look we find poster Y states that player A is better because he's a better defender and he's got more blocks and steals to show it. That is a reasonable argument no?

Flip that around and state that and point out that player A takes charges which aren't kept but are just as good as block/steals and suddenly that doesn't seem like a plausible argument? 

I and anybody else that knows a thing about basketball could care less how a player gets 2 points. That stat doesn't tell you squat about whether that player is better then another. While charge do tell you that a player provides something that another doesn't. Might as well remove blocks and steals by you're logic



> Exactly, so if they charges taken to a stat, something AV already does its just not officaly a stat, he is worth more money?


Umm yes if everything else is equal. You can argue about how much more but that player is more valuable


----------



## Larry Hughes for Retirement (Jul 5, 2004)

No but half of the people look at AV's stats and see 6 points and 6 rebounds a game, there is no way he is worth 8 million. If you watched each Cavaliers game you would see that the other stuff he brings to the table brings his value up. Such as charges, just like announcers always say, "you won't see that in tomorrow's boxscore" That is all that Andy game is about, things that aren't in the boxscores. So if what he does is included in the box score, his value to the "general" "normal" "average" fan would go up. The agents,teams,gm's all ready know his value; they do not need that stat to see it. 

But people that solely compare Collison to Andy based of boxscore #’s are retarded. Andy brings something else to the table that is over looked by the casual fan. 

For example, let’s say Yao only gets .9 blocks a game, but he makes people adjust, re a range someone shot 6 times a game. That stat is not in the book, but to the Rockets fan he is more valuable. Because when he is on the floor every shot in the paint is affected by him, but only .9 of them show up in the box score.


----------



## TucsonClip (Sep 2, 2002)

Pioneer10 said:


> Ummm: let's see you're comparing player A and player B. Poster X states that there stats from a regular (i.e. every other NBA site other then 82games.com) site states that player A is equal to player B because there stats look similar. But taking a closer look we find poster Y states that player A is better because he's a better defender and he's got more blocks and steals to show it. That is a reasonable argument no?
> 
> Flip that around and state that and point out that player A takes charges which aren't kept but are just as good as block/steals and suddenly that doesn't seem like a plausible argument?
> 
> I and anybody else that knows a thing about basketball could care less how a player gets 2 points. That stat doesn't tell you squat about whether that player is better then another. While charge do tell you that a player provides something that another doesn't. Might as well remove blocks and steals by you're logic


You are missing the point...

AV took how ever many charges last year, 1st in the NBA. Charges taken isnt a stat. If charges taken were a stat, it justifies AV being paid 8 mil per? 

This is what I know to know, because there are other people who have said if charges tanken were a stat, it justifies AV being paid 8 mil per year. My stance is that it doesnt change a damn thing. He still took the charges last year, stat or no stat, so why if it becomes a stat does it make him more valuable and now worth 8 million?


----------



## TucsonClip (Sep 2, 2002)

Larry Hughes for Retirement said:


> No but half of the people look at AV's stats and see 6 points and 6 rebounds a game, there is no way he is worth 8 million. If you watched each Cavaliers game you would see that the other stuff he brings to the table brings his value up. Such as charges, just like announcers always say, "you won't see that in tomorrow's boxscore" That is all that Andy game is about, things that aren't in the boxscores. So if what he does is included in the box score, his value to the "general" "normal" "average" fan would go up. The agents,teams,gm's all ready know his value; they do not need that stat to see it.
> 
> But people that solely compare Collison to Andy based of boxscore #’s are retarded. Andy brings something else to the table that is over looked by the casual fan.
> 
> For example, let’s say Yao only gets .9 blocks a game, but he makes people adjust, re a range someone shot 6 times a game. That stat is not in the book, but to the Rockets fan he is more valuable. Because when he is on the floor every shot in the paint is affected by him, but only .9 of them show up in the box score.


Look, obviously AV means more to you fans because of his defense. He means something to the Cavs because of his defense. Are you willing to pay 8 mil per for a post defender who doesnt even play 30 mins per game? The fact of the matter is... He is a role player. He might somehow develop into more than a role player, but his ROLE is to defend and rebound. I dont know what else you would call him besides a role player? 

Obviously, the things he does dont show up in the box score, because its not a stat. He still takes charges, everyone still recognizes him as the player who takes the most charges in the NBA. Stat or not, I recognize that fact, Cavs fans recognize that fact, NBA fans recognize that fact, and most importantly GMs recognize that fact. So........ If charges taken becomes a stat, how does a player who is recognized as the statistical leader for an unofficial stat suddenly become more valuable and NOW worth 8 million per year?

The answer... He doesnt.

Im not saying that Collison is far superior to AV. I am saying that he is just as productive scoring and rebounding as AV but for a smaller contract. Obviously, he isnt the better defender and might not be as valuable to the Cavs. The point I am trying to make is... You can trade AV to fill your other needs (PG) and pickup a cheaper player to fill in for AV and not lose anything in rebounding or scoring. Yeah you lose a defender, but you still have your two starting big men. You now (possibly) have a decent starting PG for the first time in how long? You can also find a cheaper, although maybe not as good a 1 on 1 defender, defender to fill his spot.


----------



## Larry Hughes for Retirement (Jul 5, 2004)

Larry Hughes for Retirement said:


> *So if what he does is included in the box score, his value to the "general" "normal" "average" fan would go up. The agents,teams,gm's all ready know his value; they do not need that stat to see it. *.


...


----------



## Larry Hughes for Retirement (Jul 5, 2004)

TucsonClip said:


> Look, obviously AV means more to you fans because of his defense. He means something to the Cavs because of his defense. Are you willing to pay 8 mil per for a post defender who doesnt even play 30 mins per game? The fact of the matter is... He is a role player. He might somehow develop into more than a role player, but his ROLE is to defend and rebound. I dont know what else you would call him besides a role player?
> 
> Obviously, the things he does dont show up in the box score, because its not a stat. *He still takes charges, everyone still recognizes him as the player who takes the most charges in the NBA. Stat or not, I recognize that fact, Cavs fans recognize that fact, NBA fans recognize that fact, and most importantly GMs recognize that fact. So........ If charges taken becomes a stat, how does a player who is recognized as the statistical leader for an unofficial stat suddenly become more valuable and NOW worth 8 million per year?
> 
> ...


If he averaged 2 blocks and 1.5 steals a game, so instead of charges they are considered steals or blocks. We would be talking about a player that averages 7-6-2-2 for about 25 minutes of play. Thats pretty impressive, but since charges are not included. It's something that most people over look. That is all that my point was about, he would be recognized for doing more to the normal,casual,average fan. 

That was my point, no stat or stat, he is still taken the charges regardless we realize that. So if we get him for 5/6 million, is that a steal?


----------



## Pioneer10 (Sep 30, 2004)

TucsonClip said:


> You are missing the point...
> 
> AV took how ever many charges last year, 1st in the NBA. Charges taken isnt a stat. If charges taken were a stat, it justifies AV being paid 8 mil per?
> 
> This is what I know to know, because there are other people who have said if charges tanken were a stat, it justifies AV being paid 8 mil per year. My stance is that it doesnt change a damn thing. He still took the charges last year, stat or no stat, so why if it becomes a stat does it make him more valuable and now worth 8 million?


Umm you're the one who keeps stating that AV's stats are no better then a lot of frankly mediocre or worse players. If AV was league leader in blocks that wouldn't affect how he looks in those comparisons? Of course it would be a big deal. That again doesn't mean he deserves 8 million dollars but when you bring stats into the conversation then looking at charges is important. It bears no resemblance at all about how being a better dunker somehow means the same thing asa charge


----------



## TucsonClip (Sep 2, 2002)

Larry Hughes for Retirement said:


> If he averaged 2 blocks and 1.5 steals a game, so instead of charges they are considered steals or blocks. We would be talking about a player that averages 7-6-2-2 for about 25 minutes of play. Thats pretty impressive, but since charges are not included. It's something that most people over look. That is all that my point was about, he would be recognized for doing more to the normal,casual,average fan.
> 
> That was my point, no stat or stat, he is still taken the charges regardless we realize that. So if we get him for 5/6 million, is that a steal?



You said...



Larry Hughes for Retirement said:


> *If charges taken were under the list of steals then AV would be worth 8 million* it is a stat that is never used. He around 1.5 a game, that could almost lead the league in steals, he was much more than a role player. Brian Cardinal is a role player, AV is a spark, a guy a shoulder injury away from being our starter.


5 or 6 million per year is what I would pay for him right now. If they counted charges taken as a stat, his price tag does not go up, because he is doing it anyway, which is my whole point. You said if they counted charges taken as a stat, he is now worth 8 mil per year. So if they dont count it as a stat, and he still does it, he is worth less money?


----------



## TucsonClip (Sep 2, 2002)

Pioneer10 said:


> Umm you're the one who keeps stating that AV's stats are no better then a lot of frankly mediocre or worse players. If AV was league leader in blocks that wouldn't affect how he looks in those comparisons? Of course it would be a big deal. That again doesn't mean he deserves 8 million dollars but when you bring stats into the conversation then looking at charges is important. It bears no resemblance at all about how being a better dunker somehow means the same thing asa charge


Yeah, if he leads the NBA in blocks its different. He doest, wont, and if you are referring counting charges taken as blocks then I dont know what to say to you. He leads the league in charges taken... You turn that stat into a steal and he is suddenly worth 2-3 million more per year? This is what has been said, and I referred to it in the post above. My point was, players dont get paid more when something they already do turns into a stat. They do it anyway, everyone recognizes the unofficial stat and AV as the unofficial statistical leader. He isnt going to get paid more money for something he already does becomming an official stat.


----------



## TucsonClip (Sep 2, 2002)

http://www.ohio.com/mld/ohio/sports/17485451.htm



> Sources indicate that early talks between the Cavs and Varejao revealed the sides were far apart on money. Now the Cavs have significant leverage, which could further slow the process. If the two sides cannot agree on a long-term deal, Varejao can sign a one-year contract for the Cavs' qualifying offer of $1.3 million.


----------



## Brandname (May 24, 2006)

Rumors have resurfaced that we are again working hard to get a Gooden/Bibby deal done.

If this is true, and a deal gets done in which Gooden is one of the parties leaving the Cavs, AV has an even bigger incentive to sign with us. He's guaranteed a starting position and I'd like to think with the leverage we have that we'd give him a fair deal without overpaying. Something similar to how we handled Gooden's contract. I don't think AV wants to leave, and he's going to go where money is the best anyway. 

So if Gooden were to leave as a component of the Bibby trade, it might actually improve our talks with AV because we can offer him a starting position. His price will probably be more determined by how low we can get it before just pissing him off. I don't foresee his free agency being a major problem at this point.


----------



## TucsonClip (Sep 2, 2002)

Good post Brandname...

With Gooden gone, it is possible AV would take less to stay with the Cavs and be guaranteed a starting spot, especially considering the Cavs have nearly all the leverage unless someone signs him to a large offer sheet.


----------



## Larry Hughes for Retirement (Jul 5, 2004)

Brandname said:


> Rumors have resurfaced that we are again working hard to get a Gooden/Bibby deal done.
> 
> If this is true, and a deal gets done in which Gooden is one of the parties leaving the Cavs, AV has an even bigger incentive to sign with us. He's guaranteed a starting position and I'd like to think with the leverage we have that we'd give him a fair deal without overpaying. Something similar to how we handled Gooden's contract. I don't think AV wants to leave, and he's going to go where money is the best anyway.
> 
> So if Gooden were to leave as a component of the Bibby trade, it might actually improve our talks with AV because we can offer him a starting position. His price will probably be more determined by how low we can get it before just pissing him off. I don't foresee his free agency being a major problem at this point.


I agree! 

But if we get Bibby, I'd assume Sasha is walking away?


----------



## croco (Feb 14, 2005)

Are you really THAT desperate to take Mike Bibby ?


----------



## Pioneer10 (Sep 30, 2004)

TucsonClip said:


> Yeah, if he leads the NBA in blocks its different. He doest, wont, and if you are referring counting charges taken as blocks then I dont know what to say to you. He leads the league in charges taken... You turn that stat into a steal and he is suddenly worth 2-3 million more per year? This is what has been said, and I referred to it in the post above. My point was, players dont get paid more when something they already do turns into a stat. They do it anyway, everyone recognizes the unofficial stat and AV as the unofficial statistical leader. He isnt going to get paid more money for something he already does becomming an official stat.


 No you delibrately not reading all of my post? I said that doesn't necessarily mean he's worth more but when a poster YOU keep pointing out stats then it's perfectly relevant to include charges taken which are better then blocks for a team (foul plus change of possesion, a block doesn't necessarily lead to a change of possesion). I'm not the one throwing lists of mostly crap players and saying statiscally there as good as AV. YOU are and when refuting that with a legitimate statement on the benefit of charges suddenly means to you that I'm justifying 8 million? No I'm saying he's worth more then the stats you bring up indicate - not necessarily 8 million but certainly more then a guy like Collision who is going to be paid over 6 million next year!


----------



## Brandname (May 24, 2006)

Pioneer10 said:


> No you delibrately not reading all of my post? I said that doesn't necessarily mean he's worth more but when a poster YOU keep pointing out stats then it's perfectly relevant to include charges taken which are better then blocks for a team (foul plus change of possesion, *a block doesn't necessarily lead to a change of possesion)*. I'm not the one throwing lists of mostly crap players and saying statiscally there as good as AV. YOU are and when refuting that with a legitimate statement on the benefit of charges suddenly means to you that I'm justifying 8 million? No I'm saying he's worth more then the stats you bring up indicate - not necessarily 8 million but certainly more then a guy like Collision who is going to be paid over 6 million next year!


Keep in mind that a shot-blocker also has a lot more effect in the paint that the stats would indicate. For every blocked shot, there's probably 2 or 3 shots that are altered just because of his presence, and that would be another example of something that doesn't show up in the stat sheet. So while I think you could make the argument (as you've done) that a charge is more valuable than a block, I don't think it stands to reason that a charge-taking big man like Andy is more valuable than a shot-blocking big man. 

But as far as the premise of 7pts/7reb per game not coming close to describing the contributions he makes to the team, I agree wholeheartedly. And hopefully we won't have to make a judgment on whether something like 8 million per is worth matching. From the looks of it, we're in good shape.


----------



## Brandname (May 24, 2006)

http://www.ohiomm.com/blogs/cavs/2007/07/13/new-takes-on-bibby-varejao/



> On the Anderson Varejao front, one league executive told me yesterday: “This is going to be one to watch.” He meant for entertainment value, in a sick, detatched way. *Andy’s agent, Dan Fegan, is looking for the big score. I’m talking about something like $9-$10 million a year.* I believe the Cavs are offering something much closer to $6 million a year. You don’t have to be a math major to know that is a wide gap. The Cavs will not pay it and, because Varejao is restricted and no teams who want Varejao have cap space left, they will not have to pay it. They do not have to do a sign-and-trade for it if they don’t feel like it, either. Here’s the thing, though, Fegan does not like to compromise. He may rather have Andy play out a one-year qualifying offer and become unrestricted next summer.


Uhhh.... yeah, good luck with that Fegan. The Cavs are making a fair offer here, and I hope they don't get pressured into overpaying. There's no way Andy deserves 9 or 10 per. That's ridiculous.


----------



## Pioneer10 (Sep 30, 2004)

Brandname said:


> Keep in mind that a shot-blocker also has a lot more affect in the paint that the stats would indicate. For every blocked shot, there's probably 2 or 3 shots that are altered just because of his presence, and that would be another example of something that doesn't show up in the stat sheet. So while I think you could make the argument (as you've done) that a charge is more valuable than a block, I don't think it stands to reason that a charge-taking big man like Andy is more valuable than a shot-blocking big man.
> 
> But as far as the premise of 7pts/7reb per game not coming close to describing the contributions he makes to the team, I agree wholeheartedly. And hopefully we won't have to make a judgment on whether something like 8 million per is worth matching. From the looks of it, we're in good shape.


I'm not claiming that a charge taker is as valuable is shotblocker: you're talking about value of a player I'm talking about simply comparing the effect of one block to one charge taken (i.e. does the value of a shotblocking SF like AK-47 equal that of a shotblocking big man? probably not as the perimeter player is well out on the perimeter). From a one to one comparison based on simply the stat: a charge is more useful for team then a block. I do agree that a shotblocking big man is better then a charge taking big man


----------



## Brandname (May 24, 2006)

Pioneer10 said:


> I'm not claiming that a charge taker is as valuable is shotblocker: you're talking about value of a player I'm talking about simply comparing the effect of one block to one charge taken (i.e. does the value of a shotblocking SF like AK-47 equal that of a shotblocking big man? probably not as the perimeter player is well out on the perimeter). From a one to one comparison based on simply the stat: a charge is more useful for team then a block. I do agree that a shotblocking big man is better then a charge taking big man


Yeah, that's pretty much what I was saying.


----------



## TucsonClip (Sep 2, 2002)

Pioneer10 said:


> I'm not the one throwing lists of mostly crap players and saying statiscally there as good as AV.


So statistically AV is better than those players?



> YOU are and when refuting that with a legitimate statement on the benefit of charges suddenly means to you that I'm justifying 8 million? No I'm saying he's worth more then the stats you bring up indicate - not necessarily 8 million but certainly more then a guy like Collision who is going to be paid over 6 million next year!


I know that he is worth more than his stats indicate; I have been under that impression all along. I think you are taking my argument from a different perspective and translating it into something im not arguing.

My point was...

Those players rebound above, on, or slightly under AV's level, score more than he does, and cost far less. Does that mean they are all better than AV? No, and im not implying they are. I am simply pointing out the players in the NBA who can replace his statistical production for a cheaper price. I dont think he is worth 7 or 8 mil starting, let alone per year. Obviously, he is worth just as much or a little more than Collison, but forking over 8 mil per for a guy who played 23 mins per game, shoots 47% from the field, and is really only a defender is pretty ridiculous. I guess Danny Ferry agrees with me...


----------



## Diable (Apr 26, 2005)

This agent is going to screw over Varejao if he thinks he's going to get him a bigger deal next year.There's going to dozens of bigger FA's next season and noone is going to pay any attention to Varejao until all those guys have been paid.By that time there isn't going to be any big money left for him.


----------



## Pioneer10 (Sep 30, 2004)

TucsonClip said:


> So statistically AV is better than those players?


Add in charges which you don't want to and he has a huge in that category. 




> I know that he is worth more than his stats indicate; I have been under that impression all along. I think you are taking my argument from a different perspective and translating it into something im not arguing.
> 
> My point was...
> 
> Those players rebound above, on, or slightly under AV's level, score more than he does, and cost far less. Does that mean they are all better than AV? No, and im not implying they are. I am simply pointing out the players in the NBA who can replace his statistical production for a cheaper price. I dont think he is worth 7 or 8 mil starting, let alone per year. *Obviously, he is worth just as much or a little more than Collison*, but forking over 8 mil per for a guy who played 23 mins per game, shoots 47% from the field, and is really only a defender is pretty ridiculous. I guess Danny Ferry agrees with me...


Collision is going get 6.125 million. AV for 7 million sounds that off base to you? Come on you assumed that Collison was signed for a contract at the very highest was the MLE when actuality he's paid more.


----------



## TucsonClip (Sep 2, 2002)

Pioneer10 said:


> Add in charges which you don't want to and he has a huge in that category.


So he wins a few catagories if you include "charges taken" and loses most of the rest. 



> Collision is going get 6.125 million. AV for 7 million sounds that off base to you? Come on you assumed that Collison was signed for a contract at the very highest was the MLE when actuality he's paid more.


I didnt assume anything, I know Collison's contract. I think he is a bit overpaid and 6.125 is completely different than paying AV 8 mil per year. 6.25 mil starting or per is a good deal for AV, not 8 mil per or starting.

Collison makes 25 million dollars over 4 years, not once does he make over 7 mil in a year.


----------



## Pioneer10 (Sep 30, 2004)

TucsonClip said:


> So he wins a few catagories if you include "charges taken" and loses most of the rest.


He loses most of the rest? It's interesting how you change you're terms, before he was equal to other players and now he's losing most of the statiscal categories. That's rich. Why don't you bring up his per game numbers again so that we can shoot that line of argument down again?



> I didnt assume anything, I know Collison's contract. I think he is a bit overpaid and 6.125 is completely different than paying AV 8 mil per year. 6.25 mil starting or per is a good deal for AV, not 8 mil per or starting.
> 
> Collison makes 25 million dollars over 4 years, not once does he make over 7 mil in a year.


So AV who most Cleveland fans think IS better then Collison ends up making a whole $800,000 more then an Collison (you're previous post stated you wouln'dt pay him 7 million not just 8 million) becomes a bad contract? Seems like the Cavs if they end up paying 7 million a year are paying market rate or the worst paying slightly above market rate. Not this disaster you keep trying to push.


----------



## Larry Hughes for Retirement (Jul 5, 2004)

I will let Pioneer speak my thoughts, thats why I was in hospitality and he is something really smart, but yes, he explains in ways I couldn't put it.


----------



## Pioneer10 (Sep 30, 2004)

Larry Hughes for Retirement said:


> I will let Pioneer speak my thoughts, thats why I was in hospitality and he is something really smart, but yes, he explains in ways I couldn't put it.


Blah that's the great thing about the 'Net: you're only as good as you're argument not you're station in life


----------



## TucsonClip (Sep 2, 2002)

Pioneer10 said:


> He loses most of the rest? It's interesting how you change you're terms, before he was equal to other players and now he's losing most of the statiscal categories. That's rich. Why don't you bring up his per game numbers again so that we can shoot that line of argument down again?


How did I change my argument? I argued that those players listed could score more and rebound at a better, equal, or nearly equal rate. He is going to lose FG%, FT%, points, assists, to most of those players.



> So AV who most Cleveland fans think IS better then Collison ends up making a whole $800,000 more then an Collison (you're previous post stated you wouln'dt pay him 7 million not just 8 million) becomes a bad contract? Seems like the Cavs if they end up paying 7 million a year are paying market rate or the worst paying slightly above market rate. Not this disaster you keep trying to push.


Where did I say I would pay him 7 million per year? I said I would pay him 5 or 6 mil per year right now. AV becomes a bad contract at 7 mil per year, especially if he doesnt improve much on offense. If the Cavs end up paying AV 7 mil per year, it is because they have added a guy like Bibby and want to make sure they keep AV around for the future. They would then see Bibby as the missing piece and would give AV more then they want to in order to make sure he doesnt take the QO.


----------



## Pioneer10 (Sep 30, 2004)

TucsonClip said:


> How did I change my argument? I argued that those players listed could score more and rebound at a better, equal, or nearly equal rate. He is going to lose FG%, FT%, points, assists, to most of those players.


His FG% is right on par with the average of the players you listed
His points/assists are down because he plays less minutes then most of the players you listed for the millionth time. And no those players don't get more minutes because they deserve it they don't have a competent C and PF ahead of them and they don't finish the game which AV almost always does for the Cavs



> Where did I say I would pay him 7 million per year? I said I would pay him 5 or 6 mil per year right now. AV becomes a bad contract at 7 mil per year, especially if he doesnt improve much on offense. If the Cavs end up paying AV 7 mil per year, it is because they have added a guy like Bibby and want to make sure they keep AV around for the future. They would then see Bibby as the missing piece and would give AV more then they want to in order to make sure he doesnt take the QO.


Read my post again: I said you would NOT pay him 7 million a year  Unless saying that according to you AV at 7 million is a bad contract somehow implies that you would.


----------

